Oral evidence: Primates as Pets, HC 984Wednesday 5 February 2014

Oral evidence, 5 February 2014.

Witnesses

Dr Alison Cronin, Director, Monkey World, Andrew Greenwood, British Veterinary Zoological Society, and Dr Lisa Riley, Primatologist and independent consultant in animal welfare, gave evidence.

Chair

Can I welcome you very warmly? As a little bit of housekeeping, we are expecting a vote. As far as possible, we hope to accommodate your evidence before the vote is called, so that we can then proceed to the next panel afterwards. Could I thank you very much for participating and ask each of you to introduce yourselves and give your positions for the record?

Dr Cronin

I am Dr Alison Cronin. I am the director of Monkey World Ape Rescue Centre in Dorset.

Andrew Greenwood

My name is Andrew Greenwood. I am from the International Zoo Veterinary Group and I am representing the British Veterinary Zoological Society, which is a division of the BVA. My organisation is the one that actually did the effectiveness review of the DWA in 2001 for Defra.

Dr Riley

I am Dr Lisa Riley, an independent animal welfare consultant and a specialist in primate cognition and welfare. I also currently lecture at Sparsholt College Hampshire.

Chair

How would you describe the current problems with the existing trade of primates in the United Kingdom?

Dr Cronin

It is growing exponentially, in our experience. Monkey World is the organisation here today that has the longest‑standing experience in the trade in primates kept as pets in this country and with the owners, breeders and dealers. We have been taking in primates from this trade for more than 20 years; I think it is 23 years. We have brought in 78 monkeys. Within the last two years, however, 26 of those 78 monkeys have come to us. What we are seeing is an exponential increase of the trade in the last five years. As colleagues on the previous panel mentioned, most of that trade seems to be coming in the de-listed species that are commonly purchased over the counter at a pet shop, like you would a goldfish or a budgie. These primates, who have very specialist needs, are being bought and sold to grandmothers, to young lads and even to children, because there is absolutely no regulation currently governing their breeding, their distribution, their sale and their care thereafter. It is a huge and significant problem for us.

Chair

How accurate a picture do we have of the trade at the moment? How do we know that all the trade is being reported?

Dr Cronin

It is very clear that all of the trade is not being reported.

Chair

I am sorry to press you, but what is the problem with trade? If it is legal, what is the problem with the trade at the moment? This is what we are trying to get our head around.

Dr Cronin

What I found very interesting is that so far seemingly nobody, other than ourselves at Monkey World, has alluded to the significant problems of fraudulent adverts. Your chimpanzee advert—I have a stack of them here with me today—is indeed a fraudulent advert. Well-meaning members of the British public are having their hard-earned cash taken away from them under fraudulent understandings. Breeders, dealers and pet shops are often telling people that they make lovely pets, that they are nappy-trained, that they can live as a member of the family or that they are friendly with children and other pet animals, and it simply is not true. They have very specialist needs that are not passed on to the people buying these animals. It is a significant problem for well-meaning members of the British public as well, who call us up, terribly upset.

Dr Riley

Regarding the trade, because it is mostly private people who are advertising, particularly on the internet, they pass on bad practice because they are unaware of the welfare needs of the pet. It is that transmission of bad information, such as, “It is easy to care for”, as Dr Cronin was saying. It does not just apply to the dealers, which is a significant issue; it is that private point of sale that is completely unregulated.

Chair

Could you help us by suggesting how we might get over the difficulties of getting a true picture of what the trade is?

Dr Riley

Some sort of independent research needs to be commissioned in that. If you google “monkey for sale in the UK”, it is clear there is a huge problem and vast availability, particularly of deregulated species and marmosets. There needs to be some large‑scale survey work done.

Chair

Who would be best placed to do it?

Dr Riley

That would be for the Committee to find, but, potentially, it should be someone independent: a researcher in the field or an academic.

Andrew Greenwood

Can I just put our point of view about the numbers issue and the trade issue? You will have read the BVZS’s submission. Essentially, we are in agreement with Dr Cronin and Defra itself: we would like to prevent people from keeping primates in the style of pets, which was Defra’s definition.

Chair

At the moment, we are talking about trade.

Andrew Greenwood

I know. In terms of numbers, having done this effectiveness study in 2001, the numbers are way overestimated, possibly by a factor of 10. The numbers of primates in this country is probably fewer than 1,000. We have had figures cited of up to 9,000; they are completely out of the air. A lot of it is based on the idea that there is non‑compliance and the trade would go around this non‑compliant area and also around the area of animals that were de‑listed or were never listed, like marmosets. We too have looked at the advertising and, if you just pull off a strip of UK listings and look at them very carefully, a lot of them are repetitive; a lot of them are direct copies of American advertising. They talk about monkeys in diapers.

Dr Cronin

These are the fraudulent ones.

Andrew Greenwood

Yes. It is actually not as big as it looks. Our practice has been looking after these animals for 40 years, and our impression—and that of our other colleagues in the BVZS—is that this is not nearly as big as people think it is. That does not mean it is not bad, but it is not nearly as big.

Dr Riley

That is why an independent survey is required.

Iain McKenzie

Mr Greenwood, you said there were fewer than 1,000 primates traded; would that be per year?

Andrew Greenwood

No, the total number in private hands.

Iain McKenzie

The total number of primates kept as pets is 1,000, but you do not have a timescale that has transpired in. Did it take five years to get to that 1,000 primates in private hands or did that transpire over three years? What is the timescale?

Andrew Greenwood

There is no timescale. It has always been like that, because there is an attrition rate as well as a birth rate.

Iain McKenzie

What you are saying is that at any one time there are just under 1,000 primates kept as pets in private hands?

Andrew Greenwood

I would have thought that now, at this point, there would not be more. When we did the review, there were fewer.

Iain McKenzie

My second question is: what is the value of that market to traders? Could you give us an idea of the individual price of a primate?

Dr Cronin

Take a common marmoset, which is one of the species we are talking about that is most common in the trade. Ten years ago, a male was selling for £300 and a female perhaps for £500. Within the last five years, regardless of sex, it has gone up to £1,200. There is a little bit of counterintuitive economics going on here. Probably, the numbers of animals in the trade is higher than what Andrew is estimating, simply due to how commonly and frequently we are getting calls in to Monkey World saying, “Gosh, please help”. I know we see only the tip of the iceberg. Yet at the same time, you would think if the market was flooded with more animals the price might go down; it is not. It is just going up. It is because of social media sites and the ease and availability of internet purchase. It is being made readily available for young men who want to look hip and cool down at the pub, taking a monkey on a lead or on their shoulder. We prosecuted a case a couple of weeks ago for just that in Portsmouth; this man should never have been able to purchase a marmoset, in my opinion. He was ill-equipped. He was not a terrible person—questionable, it has to be said. At the same time, a lot of well‑meaning people are getting caught.

Sheryll Murray

Madam Chair, I will try to be very quick, because I know we are short on time. The first thing is this: how much does the existing regulatory framework take account of the welfare needs of primates? Whether there are 1,000 or 10,000, surely we should be looking at the welfare of these primates. Could you answer that? Could you also please let me know if there are any gaps in the present regulatory framework and how you think these could be filled? If you could be brief, we have a lot to get through. If I can start with Dr Riley and move along.

Dr Riley

It was established by the three previous colleagues that the DWA is ineffective; non‑compliance is high. The welfare content of the DWA is small; it is focused on keeping humans safe. It does say, in a few sentences, that welfare needs to be considered, in that the environment has to be suitable, in terms of such things as light, temperature and ventilation.

Sheryll Murray

Could you expand upon whether you think people are able to keep primates as pets in the same way as other domestic animals?

Dr Riley

As a pet, no, I do not. A primate is completely unsuitable to be in a pet situation. They are wild animals. There has been no process of selective breeding or domestication for these animals. They are being bred in captivity. The trade into the country is an issue. There is an established breeding population, particularly for marmosets. However, given that they are complex in their cognition and intelligence, and the social and physical environment they need, it is not just about providing a cage that is secure, well ventilated and clean. The primate has to be intellectually stimulated for welfare to be maintained. That is the biggest restriction in what is out there now. The code of practice is completely ineffective. It takes an expert to try to decipher it. For the layperson out there, who has just purchased a primate off the internet, getting 50 pages of generalised information that is not relevant to a particular species is not helpful. For example, a marmoset should be fed on gum substitutes; they are specialist gum feeders. In the wild, most of their diet would be gum and exudates from trees, but also insects and fruit. I have worked on cases in the past where people have interpreted that to mean that you can feed Ribena to a marmoset, because it is a sap‑like, sugary product they can lap up. If you fed a child high‑sugar concentrates like that constantly, they would have dental problems, obesity problems and diabetes, and that is what you see in primates.

Andrew Greenwood

We have the Dangerous Wild Animals Act to cover those primates that are covered by that, and there are not many species of primates that are not covered. The inspection and licensing regime does have an aspect of attention to welfare. The problem, as was pointed out by one of the previous witnesses, is that local authorities do not have to choose somebody who has experience in the field to do their inspections. We at BVZS have tried to pressure Defra to ask local authorities to use people off the zoo‑licensing inspectors list and people who have diplomas in zoo and wildlife medicine, of which we have quite a lot. There are quite a lot of people who could do the job properly.

Sheryll Murray

Can I press you on that? Are these experts available nationally throughout the country?

Andrew Greenwood

Yes, they are scattered around the country. Most local authorities—especially as they are only licensing every two years now, so the cost brought to bear on the owner is not so high—will call me up to go on two or three‑hour drives to go and do these. It is not a question of not being able to find somebody. However, if local authorities have contracted somebody to do their other inspections, they tend to give them that, too. The second thing, which is supplementary to the legislation, is the guidelines that have been suggested. I rather agree with what has been said about those, but they are there. The gap we are waiting to be filled with the DWA is actually from Defra, which has been promising guidelines for local authorities on how to properly administer DWA for quite a lot time. We are pressing them to actually get them out there.

Sheryll Murray

Is the two‑year inspection regime sufficient? Secondly, when local authorities choose how to spend their limited budget, will they be reluctant to ask experts to carry out these inspections?

Andrew Greenwood

The cost of the inspection is paid by the owner; it is supposed to be cost‑neutral in terms of what the local authority charges, but the veterinary fees for inspection are added on. That could be several hundred pounds. There was a thought that some local authorities were trying to use the cost to stop people doing it. The DWA is simply a registration Act; it is not a banning Act, and it was never intended to be.

Dr Cronin

I will try to be succinct. In terms of gaps in the code of practice, as mentioned earlier, it has no teeth; there is no way of enforcing it. It does not cover the full trade, from beginning to end. It does not cover breeders and what they do, what age they can remove animals from the mother’s care in order to pass that animal onto another individual. It does not cover how you transport those animals across the country when somebody buys it off the internet. It does not even cover who is considered a breeder from their private home. As I understand it, right now there is no legislation dictating how many marmosets you have to sell from your household before you have to get a pet‑shop licence. All of these are very grey areas, meaning that the whole aspect of the trade is not covered. We have very basic recommendations that are hard for a lay person to apply to any one of more than 300 different species of primate the guidance could be covering. It is a bit of a nonsense in that sense. I have gone on numerous cases with both RSPCA inspectors and with local authority inspectors holding their code of conduct book, stood in front of it, saying, “There is the monkey”, and not being able to work out what the rest of it means. It really is a bit of a problem, both in application as well as for the monkeys and the law enforcement agencies. It is a problem.

Mrs Glindon

I would like to move onto the actual code of practice. In what ways does the current code of practice fall short? How could it be improved?

Dr Cronin

What I just said is where it falls short. In terms of how it be improved, Andrew and I have touched on a very similar thing. The highest standard of care for a primate in this country at present is the Zoo Licensing Act. There are currently five—if you include the Animal Welfare Act, six—different laws governing the care of a monkey in this country, which is one for each day of the week. Whether you are in a zoo, a circus, a private home or a pet shop, there are different laws, yet it is the same monkey. It is not a logical argument. The highest duty of care is in the Zoo Licensing Act. If a capuchin monkey in a zoo or wildlife park is deserving of a certain standard of care and has a right to that standard of care, that applies behind the net curtains as well. The monkey remains the same; it does not change; its needs are still the same. We are not suggesting a ban, but applying a standard and a duty of care that already exists in legislation in this country, with a team of expert inspectors already to hand the length and breadth of the country, which would cut away this problem. It would cut away the unscrupulous breeders and dealers selling marmosets like goldfish. That is the biggest problem. This would be a good step forward in terms of finding a reasonable solution for everybody—for owners, pet shops, local authorities and the Government.

Andrew Greenwood

I cannot disagree with that. It has some defects in the way it is written, but a lot of people who are in this room, including me, were involved in trying to help Defra draw it up. None of these things are ever perfect, but the problem is applying it. It is a bit like the Highway Code. If you are brought before a court because of a traffic accident and you were not obeying the Highway Code, you are not looked on very favourably, but it is not actually law. It is just guidance.

Dr Riley

As a code of practice, nothing is needed, because there should not be a code of practice in that sense. There should be a framework of licensing, where suitably qualified people will make the decision for the owners and can, at that time, educate the owners, although they should have educated themselves. As a standalone document, as it is, it needs to be fragmented and made into species‑specific guidance if it is going to remain in place.

Mrs Glindon

Could the Government do anything to promote the code of practice?

Dr Riley

It is already there; it is already available. In RSPCA cases, people report having got the code of practice. The problem is misinterpretation. There is some evidence suggesting that local authorities are not really aware of the code of practice or what to do with it. If you have a general licensing officer who is put in front of a code of practice specific to primates, where would they begin? As has been discussed before, they would rely on a veterinary surgeon. Getting a veterinary surgeon who is also a primate expert is a difficult thing to achieve. There are some out there—that is undeniable—but it is difficult for people to realise that a general‑practice vet is probably not the vet who is needed for this circumstance.

Mrs Glindon

There is nothing the Government could insist upon that would make that work better?

Dr Riley

The Government could always issue guidance to local authorities, but, at the end of the day, it is the owner who needs to have that information. Unless they have put themselves through training and experience and volunteered somewhere, so they can consider themselves as experienced in the species they are trying to keep for, let us say, 20 years and trying to manage in a breeding pair—a marmoset can give birth to up to six infants a year; that is a whole other issue with income and sales, as well. However, it is out there; it is freely available on the internet. You can very easily discover it; the interpretation of the document is the key problem.

Dr Cronin

I would add that, in terms of implementing the Zoo Licensing Act, it would be very easy for the Government to issue advice, as Lisa said, to local authorities to employ the inspectors and the known experts in this field of work in licensing situations. Of course, the vast majority of the primates kept in the trade that fall short of the licensing are de-listed. All the marmosets and tamarins would still fall short of that.

Sheryll Murray

Dr Riley, could the code of practice be amended to ensure that primates’ welfare is looked after, if they are kept as pets?

Dr Riley

I do not believe it could. Sections of the code clearly state that, if you keep a primate on its own and you feed it from a bowl, you are potentially committing an offence under the Animal Welfare Act. It is already written there; it is already evident. It relates back to that; it is not ensuring welfare. It is used as a very useful tool in a prosecution case, because it helps identify—for magistrates, for the prosecution or for the defence—where potential offences have occurred under the Animal Welfare Act. However, in terms of ensuring animal welfare, no, it cannot do that.

Jim Fitzpatrick

You will have heard me ask the same questions to the last panel. Dr Cronin said she was not in favour of a ban, but the universal application of best regulation across the piece. Could you clarify for me whether, on the basis of animal welfare or public health, you think individuals should not be allowed to own and keep these animals, and whether it should just be zoos and sanctuaries that have the opportunity to keep them in the UK? If you could clarify that, I would be very grateful.

Dr Riley

As far as pets go in the traditional sense, of keeping them in your house, there should be a ban. That is on welfare grounds. Public health is an issue, both in terms of zoonosis—the animal transmitting diseases to us—and also anthropozoonosis, which is us transmitting diseases to them. There is a potential for physical harm to these animals as well. They might be small, but they reach sexual maturity, testosterone takes over and they want to mate and dominate a household. Yes, there should be a ban as far as pets are concerned.

Andrew Greenwood

We certainly do not agree with the keeping of primates in the style of a pet. The people we would support—there are several groups who would be perhaps steamrollered by a ban—are serious private people, specialist keepers or collectors, most of whom are probably covered by the DWA. The largest group of primates kept under those rules are lemurs, as far as we are aware. They are all Dangerous Wild Animals Act‑listed. There are some people keeping marmosets and tamarins, but not so many of them. There are colleges of higher education, which do not have zoo licences, but at least 10 or 15 keep primates, along with reptiles and other things, to teach the students. Occasionally, there are also commercial organisations that keep primates and use them for filming and stuff like that, which keep them under zoo standards. We do not really want those people to be steamrollered up by this, because they are doing a proper job and most of them relate themselves to zoos very carefully. The trouble with banning something, as experienced with handguns and dangerous dogs, is that it is really difficult to do. If you put in a ban that requires someone to detect the animal, but you do not cut off the source, you cannot control it. There are lots of opportunities that Defra has had to cut off sources, to encourage pet shop licences to have a condition not allowing the sale of primates or DWA animals, which local authorities can put on, and to control advertising. Defra has asked for a voluntary ban on the internet advertising of primates, but it could maybe go further. In theory, you cannot import any primate into the UK unless you are Balai‑approved. That rules out any private individual.

Dr Cronin

What was your original question again? We varied from it.

Jim Fitzpatrick

On the basis of animal welfare or public health, should individuals be prevented from keeping animals? Should zoos/sanctuaries be the only people licensed to do so?

Dr Cronin

Thank you very much. No, I sit somewhere in between everybody on this. I do not believe that there should be a ban.

Jim Fitzpatrick

You said there should be universal application of the best regulations; is that right?

Dr Cronin

That is right. I am looking for the standard of care for the animal. We are all about looking after the welfare of the animals and ensuring the health and safety of members of the public. It is very possible for a person with more money than sense to keep these animals well. There is no doubt about it. In fact, there has been a long history of this and it is often how some of Britain’s best zoos and wildlife parks have started—through private individuals starting out small. It is very possible to do, but the state that the trade has gotten to at this point is that monkeys are being sold in birdcages across the counter. It is a problem. Something needs to change.

Mr Williams

Very briefly, could a ban be implemented and regulated to make it effective? If it was effective, would it lead to a drop in welfare for primates, because they would be kept unregulated?

Dr Cronin

A ban could be implemented; I would disagree with Andrew on this point. Of course, the Government can ban anything and put an infinite amount of time and money behind it. Certainly, however, I would not be so arrogant as to say that we can keep animals to a certain standard in a zoo or wildlife park, but nobody else can. It is just not a logical premise. What has to be ensured is the welfare of the animals. Currently, there is no legislation governing the care and welfare of these animals. It is leaving well‑meaning members of the public to have their money fraudulently taken from them. In the last two years, we have bought in three different animals that were sold as a completely different species.

Andrew Greenwood

Could you repeat the question?

Mr Williams

Could a ban be implemented effectively? If it were, would it lead to the welfare of primates becoming poorer rather than better?

Andrew Greenwood

That would depend. What I said to Mr Fitzpatrick is if we do not control the source, as we never did with handguns, there would then still be millions of them out there undercover. That would be a necessary corollary for any kind of ban to be effective. If it were effective, it would certainly improve the welfare of primates. Yes, it would.

Dr Riley

If you ban private keeping, there is a potential for activity to go on underground, as you put it. An effective ban on pet‑keeping could be introduced quite well and establish licensing for specialist keepers. I believe Sections 12 and 13 of the Animal Welfare Act give the power to do that.

Chair

Thank you. Thank you very much indeed on behalf of the Committee for being here and being so generous with your time and answering all our questions. Examination of Witness

Witnesses

Lord De Mauley, Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Defra, and Sue Ellis, Deputy Director, Animal Welfare Team, Defra, gave evidence.

Chair

I am delighted to welcome our Minister responsible for this area, Lord De Mauley. I am delighted you are able to be here as part of our inquiry. Would you like to introduce your colleague?

Lord De Mauley

I am accompanied by Sue Ellis.

Chair

And what is your position, for the record?

Sue Ellis

I am the head of the Animal Welfare Team in Defra.

Chair

I will start off by asking this: does the code of practice currently apply only in England?

Lord De Mauley

Yes.

Chair

Is there any particular reason why it applies only in England?

Sue Ellis

The answer is that welfare policy is one of the areas that are devolved to the devolved Administrations, so Defra just looks after welfare policy in England.

Chair

If the Department was minded to receive recommendations in favour of a ban, would it be the Department’s intention to ban the keeping of primates as pets throughout the whole of the United Kingdom?

Lord De Mauley

Could I give you the context before I answer the specific question?

Chair

Yes, of course.

Lord De Mauley

There is a misconception among some members of the public that it is acceptable to keep a primate in a cage, feed it an inappropriate diet and keep it on its own. I would like to make it clear that keeping primates in a domestic setting in isolation, outside a social group and on inappropriate diets is already against the law. It is against the Animal Welfare Act. Indeed, perhaps we might come onto how we get that message out.

Chair

I am sure we will.

Lord De Mauley

Turning to the question of a ban, first, I am not convinced that a complete ban would be proportionate, nor would it be easy to enforce. I also have some concerns that it could lead to unintended consequences. I mentioned keeping primates in a domestic setting, feeding them on inappropriate diets and keeping them alone. It would be extraordinarily difficult to do that under the Animal Welfare Act.

Chair

Could I pause there? We will come onto the ban later. We have heard conflicting evidence as to how big the problem actually is. Do you have a view in the Department of how extensive the keeping of primates and the trade is?

Lord De Mauley

Yes. I have considered a number of facts in assessing the answer to your question. The sorts of figures quoted by the various charities for the numbers in private ownership seem to range between 2,500 and 7,500. Importantly, those include those with specialist private keepers. They do not by any means all fall into the category of primates kept by people as pets. Andrew Greenwood, who was before you a moment ago, came up with a much smaller number.

Chair

1,000.

Lord De Mauley

Yes, that is what I heard. Numbers at this sort of level are underlined, for example, by the number of primates being re‑homed, at fewer than 20 a year, by the number of people being bitten in the UK, which was two for the period from April to October last year, and by the fact that the RSCPA said they have had seven successful prosecutions since the Act came into force, and it has investigated 258 cases in 10 years. That is my view of the scope of the problem we are talking about.

Chair

Do you have a view on the evidence for the emotional, social, psychological and physical impacts on primates kept as pets?

Lord De Mauley

I am not a biologist or a scientist, but I am satisfied, as I said earlier, that it would be extraordinarily difficult for it to be legal to keep primates under those circumstances. As a layman, it is difficult for me to go further than that.

Chair

That is fair enough. We did hear—I do not know if this was shared with you—that there has been a delay in issuing guidance from the Department to local authorities. Would you like to share with us why there has been this delay?

Lord De Mauley

I think that is on the Dangerous Wild Animals Act; am I right?

Chair

It was the Dangerous Wild Animals Act, yes.

Lord De Mauley

All I can say is that we are actively working on that guidance and will expedite it. I will take away the message.

Chair

That is the answer to a different question. The question I asked was about why it has been delayed.

Lord De Mauley

It is going through the usual procedures to get it right.

Mr Williams

You might have covered this before. Could you tell us exactly how the Government estimates the extent of trade in primates in England or the UK? How concerned are you that you have a model or system for making an accurate estimate?

Lord De Mauley

This is really a question about the trade, which is slightly different to the question I addressed earlier. First, as to imports, in the past five years, December 2008 to 2013, four live primates were reported as being imported into the UK from outside the EU for personal purposes; there were three in 2010 and one in 2011. Two of those four animals were imported by an animal sanctuary. Imports of wild‑taken primates are subject to particularly rigorous control under the CITES system. As regards border controls, there are procedures under which primates have to go to specific points of entry and they are quarantined as appropriate, and so on. There are pretty rigorous border‑control procedures. You may ask me, “What about illegal imports?” The law is very clear. There are border‑force controls. They have to operate on an intelligence‑led basis and follow a risk‑based system. If people have evidence of imports, they should report them. I am not aware of public suggestions that there is a widespread problem with that.

Mr Williams

What about internal trade in the country itself?

Lord De Mauley

Again, I am not aware of a widespread problem. The place where it would become apparent is through advertising. We have discussed irresponsible advertising of pet animals with the Pet Advertising Advisory Group, which has been lobbying operators and internet sites to adopt minimum standards for advertising pet animals and they will continue to press others to adopt them. We would endorse those standards. The major websites, many of which I have met, have cooperated with the charities; they have independent moderators who monitor their sites and take down inappropriate advertisements. Certainly, primates would be regarded as inappropriate advertisements. That is my answer to that point.

Mr Williams

You say you attempt to get this measured by looking at adverts; what is the conclusion of that?

Lord De Mauley

It is quite difficult, because I understand that there are quite a lot of bogus adverts; in fact, I suspect the majority of adverts are bogus and designed to defraud people. As I say, it is quite difficult to get a handle on an accurate number.

Mrs Glindon

Lord De Mauley, could I press a little further on adverts? From what you have said, do you really believe the Government is doing enough to regulate the trading of primates, especially on the internet?

Lord De Mauley

It might be worth adding, in the context of Mr Williams’ question, that I noticed the ADI’s evidence to you says that one report found relatively small numbers of primates available in pet shops, wildlife classified ads and over the internet. The danger with trying to regulate too hard is that one essentially forces the websites overseas, where they can still advertise things in this country, but we cannot get hold of them and bear down on them. On the other hand, adopting a voluntary approach and really working with these shops—we are trying to do this; PAAG, the Pet Advertising Advisory Group, are working really hard on this and are showing some progress—is a much better way to get on top of the problem.

Mrs Glindon

You said that the keeping a primate as a pet in a domestic setting would likely be a breach of the Animal Welfare Act 2006. However, the adverts themselves, as they are now, do seem to promote primates as pets; how do you reconcile that? The very fact that the adverts are advertising them as pets means that the Act really is not being enforced sufficiently.

Lord De Mauley

I am not sure I necessarily agree with that. A high proportion of these ads are actually bogus, but, to the extent that they are genuine, the major websites I am in touch with—there are seven or eight of them—take those adverts down when they are reported to them.

Jim Fitzpatrick

In terms of the animals that do come into the country, obviously the illegally imported animals are under the radar; it is very difficult to work out how they are arriving. In terms of the animals coming in legally and what evidence there is about them, are they coming in by air, sea, Eurostar or in individual vehicles? Is there any favourite route into the country? Is there any information on that?

Lord De Mauley

I am not aware of the answer to that. I can look into it for you.

Sue Ellis

If there are any primates coming in to the country, they do have to go through rabies control points, and there are only a limited number of those available. They do have to come through designated control points complete with health certification, etc.

Chair

Could I ask one question from the evidence session we heard earlier? There appears to be a lack of proper research and knowledge as to the numbers of non‑human primates both held as pets and in trade. It was put to us that there was scope for independent research in this regard. Would you agree that that would possibly be a good idea? Obviously, it would probably be overseen by the Department; however, do you have an idea about who would be the best body to conduct such research?

Lord De Mauley

As I have already explained to you, my understanding of the scope of the problem is that the numbers we are talking about are approximately one primate for every 8,000 people in the population of this country. That compares with, for instance, one dog for every eight people. I have to be mindful of getting this issue in proportion. I am doubtful that it would be a good use of resources to carry out a detailed survey. It would be an exercise fraught with practical difficulties, and it would be expensive to get anything near a reliable figure. Given the size of the problem, as suggested by the majority of the welfare charities, it would be difficult to justify it.

Chair

To be absolutely clear, you are saying, hand on heart, that you are confident that you know both the number of primates currently, of all shapes and sizes, being held as pets in this country and, hand on heart, you can say you are confident you know the number of primates, of all shapes and sizes, coming into this country in trade?

Lord De Mauley

I certainly did not say that about how many there are here. I specifically said that we understand, from the numbers provided by the various charities, that there are between 2,500 and 7,500. I do not know the exact number, but, given that sort of scope of the problem, when you compare it with some of the really big issues in animal welfare that we must address, it is difficult to put it as a top priority. As regards imports, we do have good figures for those that are legally imported, yes.

Chair

If there were to be—heaven forfend—a virus, which we are told would not necessarily be a large occurrence but could occur, passing from one of these primates to a human, might you revise your opinion?

Lord De Mauley

I certainly agree that, due to the close genetic relationship between non-human primates and ourselves, disease‑causing organisms may be easily exchanged between us. The significant and dangerous diseases, mercifully, are not present in the country. This particular risk is over importing animals carrying diseases. Whilst we understand there is a risk of disease transmission to humans, we have to remember that imports and trade are regulated by international law and animal health is a very high priority within that. Every animal bought lawfully into the UK will have been subject to animal health checks as required by the Balai Directive.

Chair

We will draw our own conclusions possibly from what you have said.

Sheryll Murray

Lord De Mauley, can I ask whether there is a clear difference between keeping primates as pets and keeping a domestic animal such as a cat or a dog? Do you think there are any special requirements that are needed, between the two?

Lord De Mauley

Yes, I certainly do. A primate must be fed the appropriate diet, which is something that I would not expect a layman to know. They need to be kept in social groups of their own species and in large enclosures. All those characteristics, it seems to me, are very difficult to meet.

Sheryll Murray

Given the welfare concerns we have heard about in earlier evidence sessions, is this not an area that could benefit from perhaps further legislation and regulation?

Lord De Mauley

First, we have the Animal Welfare Act, which is an extremely effective piece of legislation. Allied to that, we have the “Code of Practice for the Welfare of Privately Kept Non‑Human Primates”, which came into being in 2009. I did want to inform the Committee that we will shortly be beginning a review of that. We have to review it next year, so we will be beginning the review towards the end of this year. Your input to that review, the evidence you will have heard and anything else you would like to give to us will be very welcome.

Sheryll Murray

I have one of the sanctuaries in my constituency. I have worked very closely with them and I have seen a lot of rescued primates brought in; in fact they are over-capacity now, because of the amount they have had to rescue. How confident are you that the Animal Welfare Act 2006 and the other legislation that you have mentioned provide adequate protection for those primates kept privately? If you came to my constituency, to Wild Futures, you would see there is a growing problem with this.

Lord De Mauley

I am confident the legislation is adequate to deal with animal welfare. Yes, I am.

Sheryll Murray

So although you are going to review it, you do not actually think we need to change it in any way?

Lord De Mauley

The legislation does not need changing; it is a question of how to interpret it, and that is what the code helps with.

Sheryll Murray

Do you think the code could be interpreted in different ways, so that we are not protecting the welfare of primates?

Lord De Mauley

If that is a concern, it is certainly something I am prepared to look at.

Neil Parish

Has Defra undertaken any reviews of the ability and effectiveness of local authorities to grant licences for privately kept primates, particularly in relation to welfare concerns? In many ways, you need expert veterinary advice to be able to come to terms with whether these animals are being kept properly and adequately. Do local authorities have those resources and what is Defra’s view of it?

Lord De Mauley

The code itself includes comprehensive details of experts who can be contacted by local authorities. It is right there in the inside back cover of the code. There is a question as to whether there is adequate veterinary cover, but Mr Greenwood said there are vets around the country, and it is a question of finding them, and that is what the code can help with.

Neil Parish

I am interested in the numbers here. We have anything between 2,500 and 7,500 primates. You talked about only four animals coming in from outside the EU. Do you actually know how many are coming in from the EU? If you cannot say now, perhaps it can be provided in written evidence. I do not quite understand how these thousands and thousands of primates are here. I am not convinced that anybody actually knows where they are and how they are being kept. That might be a bit of a charge, but this is what worries us all: are we actually getting to grips with where these primates are?

Lord De Mauley

In answer to your question about what is coming in from the EU, between 2012 and 2014, there have been 84 consignments of primates traded between EU member states and the UK, and 43 as third‑country imports. All of these consignments were licensed in Balai‑approved or registered establishments.

Neil Parish

When you say consignments, is that individual animals or a number in each?

Lord De Mauley

It is a number.

Neil Parish

You can see where I am coming from. If you have 5,000 primates in this country, either they are being bred in this country and traded or they are coming in in some shape or form. We do not have a handle on how many are coming in.

Lord De Mauley

I would point out that they do live quite long lives.

Neil Parish

Even if they live 10, 20 or 30 years, if you do the arithmetic to get to between 5,000 and 7,000 it takes quite a few primates to come in.

Lord De Mauley

As I said earlier in my analysis of the scope of the problem, in terms of priorities for Government, when you consider, even at the top end of the range given by the RSPCA—7,500—that is one for every 8,000 members of the population compared with one dog for every eight members of the population. One has to prioritise where one puts one’s effort.

Neil Parish

I do not necessarily disagree with you there, Minister. However, you are asking local authorities to do this monitoring and you are saying there is no need for a change in law, about which you may well be right. Are the present laws we have actually being administered and are you actually confident that anybody is checking this? I am not necessarily knocking local authorities. You say that Government has an awful lot to do, but then so do local authorities.

Lord De Mauley

They have powers under the Animal Welfare Act and the code of practice helps them carry that out. It is up to local authorities to make their own priorities for action. For some it may be primates kept in the home; for others it will be other things. It has to be up to them to make those sorts of decisions. Of course, there is also the ability for individuals to report issues to the RSPCA, who also follow up these matters.

Neil Parish

I think I know the answer to my next question. Will you consider transferring responsibility for licensing to central Government, where a centre of expertise could be created?

Lord De Mauley

I am not convinced about a centralised system of licensing. I imagine you are referring to pet‑shop licensing.

Neil Parish

Yes, and also to making sure generally that people who are keeping primates are keeping them properly.

Lord De Mauley

There is a system of pet‑shop licensing. Anyone selling any animal must be licensed under the Pet Animals Act 1951 and open to inspection by local authorities; at least this applies to anyone, in the context of a shop, who is doing it as a business. As regards a dedicated licensing scheme for the ownership of primates, I am not convinced that would have any significant advantages over the existing legislation. You will be aware that we used to have a system for licensing dogs in this country, which was abandoned because it was expensive to administer and many dog owners simply ignored it. I have seen figures from the primate rescue centres, which suggest the numbers of primates being rescued has gone up in recent years. Those numbers are still fewer than 20 a year, which does not suggest to me a need for a new animal welfare regulatory regime.

Mrs Lewell-Buck

Based on your earlier comments, am I right in thinking that you agree with some of the witnesses that the code of practice is perhaps inadequate?

Lord De Mauley

I certainly agree that it will shortly have a review and I am open to suggestions. Certainly, the sorts of people who have been in front of you would be the stakeholders to whom we would look for assistance with that review.

Mrs Lewell-Buck

I am curious as to what we can expect from this review. You have been clear that the law does not need changing, but one of the criticisms of the code is that it lacks any teeth and does not have any force. What can people actually expect from the review?

Lord De Mauley

I do not want to prejudge that. I am sorry to give you that answer, but it is the sort of exercise where I really want to hear from the stakeholders—the charities, the welfare organisations and your Committee—what the concerns are and take that into account.

Mrs Lewell-Buck

What I am trying to get at, Lord De Mauley, is that there is obviously a reason that it is being reviewed. What is the reason it is being reviewed? Is it hoped this review will put to bed the reason why it is being reviewed, if I am making sense there?

Lord De Mauley

The reason it is being reviewed is because it is due for review five years after it came into force.

Mrs Lewell-Buck

Is it just going to be an exercise where we will get the same code again?

Lord De Mauley

No, certainly not.

Mrs Lewell-Buck

I would hope not, and I am sure everyone here would hope that.

Lord De Mauley

It is going to be a proper review. That is why I am very keen to hear views. I am serious about this: I do not want to prejudge, but I do want to hear the views of the stakeholders.

Mrs Lewell-Buck

We can expect some positive changes from it, at least?

Lord De Mauley

If it needs change, we are very receptive to that.

Sheryll Murray

On that point, Lord De Mauley, could you give me some examples of the way other European countries deal with this matter? Are there any European countries that have a ban, for instance? Is there any evidence that that has driven it underground? I am thinking, perhaps, of Belgium.

Lord De Mauley

There are several countries that have brought in a ban, yes. One of my concerns with that is we could risk either suddenly overwhelming our rescue centres with too many new candidates—

Sheryll Murray

Could I stop you there? If you had a grandfather clause or something like that, do you think it would be workable? Secondly, if we have seen a ban introduced in other European countries, might it have driven the primate trade into countries like ours? We could be seen as a nation that is pretty weak, as far as regulation is concerned, throughout Europe.

Lord De Mauley

In answer to your first question, yes. I agree with you that grandfather rights are the route several of those countries have gone. The worry I have about that is these animals live, as I said earlier, for many years. It would make enforcement extremely difficult, because you would not know whether it was an animal that predates the ban or not. It would be very, very difficult to police. Secondly, on your question about forcing it underground, there is a distinct possibility it would force ownership underground. I worry about that, because it would mean that those animals that were kept in homes—something all of us would much rather did not happen—would be denied proper veterinary care, because you could not take it openly to a vet to have it looked at.

Neil Parish

Going back to my final questions on whether you want to transfer monitoring to a Government organisation, is there a role for Defra and Government to have an expert or a couple of expert vets across the country who can help local authorities? One of the arguments is over whether smaller local authorities, especially, have the ability and the funds to have that expertise.

Lord De Mauley

Yes. It is specifically set out at the back of the code. Annex 1 of the code is extremely helpful about where you can go to get help with that.

Neil Parish

You are confident that local authorities can do that?

Lord De Mauley

They can do that.

Neil Parish

I am glad to hear it.

Jim Fitzpatrick (in the Chair)

Minister, we are keen to let you go as soon as we have asked the last couple of questions. In terms of the five‑yearly review that Mrs Lewell‑Buck was asking about, we heard evidence earlier today about five different codes operating for different aspects of ownership. Will the review be looking at trying to bring those different codes together?

Lord De Mauley

I am not entirely sure what all the other codes are. The code I am talking about is the one that is called the “Code of Practice for the Welfare of Privately Kept Non‑Human Primates”. There may be codes that are under different legislation to deal with dangerous wild animals and those sorts of things.

Sue Ellis

There are zoo standards, but they set out broad requirements and principles. There are some specific requirements in the zoo standards for some species groups, but I understand that does not include primates; they are only covered by the general standards.

Jim Fitzpatrick (in the Chair)

One thing that has come across today from different witnesses is the general acceptance that there is a lack of accurate data, simply because of the nature of ownership, because some of it is under the radar and because of the different species, etc. The RSPCA in one part said there was an increase of 73% in reports in 2012-2013, or 2011‑2012—certainly beyond the recession, which might suggest there is some kind of increase in the numbers of animals being kept. The accuracy of data does seem to be key to all of this. We have heard estimates, as I say, that there are fewer than 1,000 animals to the figures you quoted yourself of between 2,500 and 7,500. How do you think you might you be able to get a handle on the size of the problem and then determine what the Department needs to do about it?

Lord De Mauley

I have given you my best answer to that question, Mr Fitzpatrick. I cannot really do any better than I have done already.

Jim Fitzpatrick (in the Chair)

The Department clearly is therefore relatively comfortable with the regime that exists at the moment and is not looking at moving towards any additional prohibition or ban in this field?

Lord De Mauley

I have not heard anything that changes my view that a ban per se is a good idea. Having said that, my view is that the Animal Welfare Act makes it extraordinarily difficult for someone to keep primates as pets in the home under inappropriate conditions, which I have explained. As I have tried to say, I am entirely open to amendments to the code, which we are shortly to start to review.

Sheryll Murray

How many of the superb animal welfare rescue centres have you visited since you took office and gained expertise from?

Lord De Mauley

I have not myself visited them, but representatives from them have come to see me.

Sheryll Murray

Given that you are looking at the code, would you be going around and actually taking some evidence from them?

Lord De Mauley

That would be a good idea.

Jim Fitzpatrick (in the Chair)

Minister and Ms Ellis, thank you so much. We are very grateful for the invitation to submit a report on the back of this evidence session to contribute to your five‑yearly review. If there is any advance notice of when we should be submitting that by, that would be extremely welcome. Thank you very much for your time today; we are very grateful for your appearance in front of the Committee. Thank you. Oral evidence: Primates as Pets, HC 984 6