Ms Kali Mountford (Colne Valley, Labour)

I beg to move amendment No. 55, in

schedule 4, page 34, line 24, at end insert—

'(ca) protecting animals from being harmed or exploited by betting'.

Mr Eric Illsley (Barnsley Central, Labour)

With this it will be convenient to discuss amendment No. 56, in

schedule 4, page 35, line 7, leave out '(c)' and insert '(ca)'.

Ms Kali Mountford (Colne Valley, Labour)

The amendment again probes the Minister's intentions. He offered us a pretty stout belt earlier today when we were discussing the welfare of animals, both at the track with vets and post-retirement.

The amendment would give the Gaming Board responsibility to monitor animal welfare at the track, including such aspects as the height and type of jump that the animal is asked to address, the type of stabling available at the track and the animal's welfare during the race. We would therefore be assured that the present good practice would continue well into the future.

I hope that the Minister will be able to tell me, as he did earlier, that the welfare of animals at the track is already assured, in which case I shall consider what he says. All members of the Committee have agreed today that the racing industry has greater concern for the welfare of animals than other sports have, but I want to see that carried through to the future. That is what the amendment seeks to achieve.

Mr Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath, Conservative)

Again, I shall be interested to hear what the Minister says in reply. I am glad that the hon. Lady raises welfare concerns, as she and my hon. Friend the Member for Loughborough did earlier.

Many of the animal welfare organisations, not only the RSPCA but organisations such as the International League for the Protection of Horses, do worthwhile welfare work, including in some cases arranging for the care of former racehorses. As I regularly find myself driving past the ILPH headquarters near Snetterton when visiting my farming family in Norfolk, I thought that this would be a useful opportunity to place on record the important work that some of those charities do. I see the hon. Lady nodding. I know that she is aware of the issues.

I look forward to hearing what the Minister says. I agree with the hon. Lady that racing has a good animal welfare record. This small group of amendments gives us a good opportunity to place on record the worthwhile work that racing, those connected with racing and reputable animal welfare charities do in this area.

Mr Andrew Rosindell (Romford, Conservative)

I endorse the amendment. The welfare of animals should always be uppermost in the minds of people who take part in sporting activities. There is a greyhound stadium in my constituency, so I am concerned about the welfare of greyhounds. Of course, that is not encompassed by the Bill, but the same principle applies.

I hope that the Minister will take on board the concerns raised by the hon. Member for Colne Valley. It is vital that we ensure that the matter is dealt with by the Bill. In his response, would the Minister clarify any discussions he may have had with horse welfare organisations? I would particularly like to know whether he has had any discussions with the British Horse Society or other groups that take animal welfare to heart with regard to sporting activities.

Mr Richard Caborn (Minister of State (Sport and Tourism), Department for Culture, Media & Sport; Sheffield Central, Labour)

Amendments Nos. 55 and 56 would require the Gaming Board to consider animal welfare when deciding whether to approve a race course for betting purposes. Again, I understand and appreciate the good intentions of my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley, which lie behind her amendment. However, with respect, her amendment is a misjudgment of the purpose of the amendments we are making to section 13 of the 1963 Act.

The Gaming Board will be given the task of approving race courses for betting, and foremost in their consideration must be the three principles that we decided on the basis of good gambling regulation. To remind the Committee, those are: keeping betting crime-free, ensuring it is fair and open, and—very importantly—protecting children and the vulnerable. It would be inappropriate, therefore, for the Gaming Board to consider animal welfare matters alongside those. Animal welfare, although most important, is not strictly relevant to the orderly conduct of betting on the racecourse.

Mr Adrian Sanders (Torbay, Liberal Democrat)

It strikes me that there is a connection between welfare, betting and potential corruption when a decision has to be taken on whether a race should take place because of weather conditions. Would that not mean that the consideration of animal welfare comes within the terms of reference that the Minister has given?

Mr Richard Caborn (Minister of State (Sport and Tourism), Department for Culture, Media & Sport; Sheffield Central, Labour)

No, it would not be a decision of the Gaming Board. The stewards would make a judgment on weather conditions, and we are talking about the legislation. The amendment would also place an unnecessary burden on the Gaming Board, which understands that it does not have expertise in this area. Many of those who know the members of the Gaming Board will know that they do their job very efficiently,

but they do not have the expertise in the area referred to by the amendment.

Nevertheless, I take note of the underlying concerns that have prompted the amendments relating to welfare. I shall make sure that my officials bring the matter to the attention of my colleagues in DEFRA who have responsibility for animal welfare. As an aside, I would say in answer to the question raised about relationships with industry that I work closely with DEFRA on several issues relating to horses, and this is one of them. We have responsibility for racing and gambling, but my colleagues have much wider responsibilities as far as horses, and animal welfare, are concerned. We work closely with that Department on an official and at a political level, which has been shown recently in several Government initiatives that have operated across Departments. With that, I hope that my hon. Friend will withdraw her amendment, but I shall raise the issue with my colleagues in DEFRA.

Ms Kali Mountford (Colne Valley, Labour)

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend, and I have listened carefully to his reply. I am concerned that the welfare of animals should be considered during betting. Certainly an animal's known condition during a race is a betting issue. That might be covered if we dealt with criminality in racing, to which my right hon. Friend has alluded. It could also be argued that this part of the schedule meets some of my concerns—for example, about race fixing that involves the fences. However, I have wider concerns. My right hon. Friend rightly cited the useful work done by DEFRA, but I am still worried about the design of the course and the stabling of animals. Perhaps I can take up those issues later when I have had discussions with DEFRA.

I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Schedule 4 agreed to.