Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what recent assessment her Department has made of the level of a) pain, b) suffering, c) distress and d) lasting harm caused to dogs covered by service licences under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.

All project licence applications, including service licences which use specially protected species such as dogs and non-human primates, are subject to a rigorous harm-benefit analysis (HBA), required under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (ASPA). The HBA ensures that a project is only granted where a Home Office Inspector is satisfied that the likely harms to animals, including pain, suffering, distress and any lasting harm, are justified by the expected benefits for humans, animals or the environment.

Under ASPA, projects proposing the use of specially protected species may only be authorised where no animal of lower sentience can be used to achieve the scientific objectives. In all cases, the principles of replacement, reduction and refinement (the 3Rs) must be fully applied. This means that animal use is permitted only where no validated alternative exists, the minimum number of animals is used, and the most refined methods are used to minimise harm.

The Home Office publishes annual statistics of scientific procedures on living animals in Great Britain, which break down procedures by species, type of procedure, and actual severity experienced by animals. They are available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics-of-scientific-procedures-on-living-animals. Information on the severity of procedures involving NHPs and dogs is set out in Table 3.1, with severity categorised under ASPA as non-recovery, mild, moderate or severe.

Additionally, the Home Office expects to respond to recommendations from the Animals in Science Committee on the use of NHPs in service licences, which is aimed at further strengthening protections for NHPs used in science for service licences.