– in the House of Commons at 12:00 am on 10 April 1973.
Dr David Clark
, Colne Valley
I beg to move,
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to forbid the pasturing of bulls aged 12 months and over at large in fields and enclosures containing public rights of way.
There is obviously—[Interruption.]
Mr Selwyn Lloyd
, Wirral
Order. Hon. and right hon. Members wanting to conduct conversations will please do so outside the Chamber. Mr. David Clark.
Dr David Clark
, Colne Valley
There is obviously a certain comedy about bulls chasing people. However it is a comic aspect which can sometimes have extremely serious consequences. In introducing the Bill, I should like to remind the House that four people in 1971, the last year for which I have figures, were killed by bulls and that a further 59 people were fairly seriously injured by them. Bulls are extremely dangerous animals. With the Bill I seek to contain this danger, especially as it affects people on public highways, namely, public footpaths.
There is considerable confusion about the law on the subject and rationalisation is now called for. There is a statutory provision of this nature in Scotland which I believe should be extended to England and Wales. In this thesis I have the support of the Gosling Committee, which was set up by the then Minister of Housing and Local Government and which reported in 1968. In paragraph 60 the Report recommended that
the pasturing of bulls over 12 months old at large in any field through which there is a public footpath should be prohibited".
Unfortunately that recommendation was never acted upon, probably because there was no imminent pressure at the time. However, over the past 18 months pressures have developed which constitute and introduce a sense of urgency in the situation. The situation is that the Home Office in times past very wisely sent round a model byelaw to all county councils asking them to introduce a bye-law which would stop bulls being pastured in fields where there were public footpaths. All the county councils except two in Wales accepted this byelaw, with certain modifications. That was the position only about 18 months ago. Since that time there has been a spate of activity in various county councils to get these byelaws rescinded. At least five counties are currently actively in the process of changing their byelaws as far apart as Staffordshire and Dorset.
An examination shows that this is not mere coincidence but part of a calculated campaign to bring pressure to bear to change the byelaws. The reason put forward is that the country is in need of beef and one way to get more beef would be to rescind these byelaws. That is a spurious argument. We have a duty in Parliament to protect the Majority of the population from these pressures. I maintain that for two basic reasons. Public footpaths have been deemed by this House to be public rights of way. They are not traditional rights, they are statutory rights, and if anyone tries to block the footpath by barbed wire the landowner is hauled before a court and action follows. I submit that the presence of a bull in a field where there is a public path is as much a deterrent as any barbed wire.
All this is happening at a period in out history when we are trying to relieve urban pressure and encourage people to use the countryside for their leisure in a responsible manner.
The other point I feel that it is necessary to advance in support of the Bill is that bulls are extremely dangerous. Certain theories are often advanced to suggest that certain bulls are safe. These theories, I submit, are far from being foolproof. It is thought that a dehorned bull is not dangerous. In 1971 a dehorned bull killed a farmworker in Lancashire. It is further argued that the beef-breed bull is less dangerous than the milk-breed bull. In 1971 in Northumberland a farmer was killed by an Aberdeen Angus, which is a beef-breed bull. The third point often made is that bulls grazing with cows and heifers are quite safe. They may be safer, but they are never safe, as was shown, again in 1971.
In seeking leave to introduce the Bill I have concentrated a great deal on the danger. I have in my possession a letter from the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food dated 26th March in which it comments on bulls in this way:
The only safe action that anyone can take when a bull charges is to run for the nearest refuge. It is certainly true that a bull can run faster than most human beings but once a bull has caught you he will knock you down however large a stick you are carrying, and injuries that could well be fatal will result. Bulls are always a potential danger and it is advisable to treat them with extreme caution.
That is a definitive statement from the Ministry and a correct one.
I also have the backing of dwellers in rural areas and of the National Union of Agricultural and Allied Workers. In a letter to me on 30th March the union says that it backs the Bill. The writer of the letter says that he and his colleagues go further and
… regard it as urgently necessary in view of what appears to be a concerted effort on the part of the NFU to effect a change in the byelaws which, in my Union's view, would not only constitute a danger to the user of the countryside, especially children, but would also be detrimental to the environment…
I submit that this Bill is necessary. I suggest that the byelaws which we have
are sensible byelaws I submit that we should retain the present situation. It is our duty to protect the balance in the countryside. I beg leave to introduce this Bill to do just that.
Mr James Ramsden
, Harrogate
Mr Selwyn Lloyd
, Wirral
Does the right hon. Member want to oppose the Bill?
Mr James Ramsden
, Harrogate
Very briefly, Mr. Speaker, I am against this Bill. I do not intend to divide the House but I am against it because although there is some truth in what the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Mr. David Clark) says about the danger of bulls, if the problem is properly handled I do not think there is a case for legislation.
I was a member of the Standing Committee on the Countryside Bill, which was promoted by hon. Gentlemen opposite. It contained a Clause along the lines of the hon. Member's proposal but the clause was withdrawn with the assent of Ministers of the Labour Party, on mature consideration and after consultations with the interests concerned.
I cannot remember whether I omitted to say that I am the owner of a bull which from time to time ranges in pastures traversed by footpaths.
Despite the reasonableness of the hon. Member's case, I do not think there is a case for legislation.
Ministers make up the Government and almost all are members of the House of Lords or the House of Commons. There are three main types of Minister. Departmental Ministers are in charge of Government Departments. The Government is divided into different Departments which have responsibilities for different areas. For example the Treasury is in charge of Government spending. Departmental Ministers in the Cabinet are generally called 'Secretary of State' but some have special titles such as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Ministers of State and Junior Ministers assist the ministers in charge of the department. They normally have responsibility for a particular area within the department and are sometimes given a title that reflects this - for example Minister of Transport.
The term "majority" is used in two ways in Parliament. Firstly a Government cannot operate effectively unless it can command a majority in the House of Commons - a majority means winning more than 50% of the votes in a division. Should a Government fail to hold the confidence of the House, it has to hold a General Election. Secondly the term can also be used in an election, where it refers to the margin which the candidate with the most votes has over the candidate coming second. To win a seat a candidate need only have a majority of 1.
In a normal session there are up to ten standing committees on bills. Each has a chair and from 16 to 50 members. Standing committee members on bills are appointed afresh for each new bill by the Committee of Selection which is required to take account of the composition of the House of Commons (ie. party proportions) as well as the qualification of members to be nominated. The committees are chaired by a member of the Chairmen's Panel (whose members are appointed by the Speaker). In standing committees the Chairman has much the same function as the Speaker in the House of Commons. Like the Speaker, a chairman votes only in the event of a tie, and then usually in accordance with precedent. The committees consider each bill clause by clause and may make amendments. There are no standing committees in the House of Lords.
A parliamentary bill is divided into sections called clauses.
Printed in the margin next to each clause is a brief explanatory `side-note' giving details of what the effect of the clause will be.
During the committee stage of a bill, MPs examine these clauses in detail and may introduce new clauses of their own or table amendments to the existing clauses.
When a bill becomes an Act of Parliament, clauses become known as sections.
The Speaker is an MP who has been elected to act as Chairman during debates in the House of Commons. He or she is responsible for ensuring that the rules laid down by the House for the carrying out of its business are observed. It is the Speaker who calls MPs to speak, and maintains order in the House. He or she acts as the House's representative in its relations with outside bodies and the other elements of Parliament such as the Lords and the Monarch. The Speaker is also responsible for protecting the interests of minorities in the House. He or she must ensure that the holders of an opinion, however unpopular, are allowed to put across their view without undue obstruction. It is also the Speaker who reprimands, on behalf of the House, an MP brought to the Bar of the House. In the case of disobedience the Speaker can 'name' an MP which results in their suspension from the House for a period. The Speaker must be impartial in all matters. He or she is elected by MPs in the House of Commons but then ceases to be involved in party politics. All sides in the House rely on the Speaker's disinterest. Even after retirement a former Speaker will not take part in political issues. Taking on the office means losing close contact with old colleagues and keeping apart from all groups and interests, even avoiding using the House of Commons dining rooms or bars. The Speaker continues as a Member of Parliament dealing with constituent's letters and problems. By tradition other candidates from the major parties do not contest the Speaker's seat at a General Election. The Speakership dates back to 1377 when Sir Thomas Hungerford was appointed to the role. The title Speaker comes from the fact that the Speaker was the official spokesman of the House of Commons to the Monarch. In the early years of the office, several Speakers suffered violent deaths when they presented unwelcome news to the King. Further information can be obtained from factsheet M2 on the UK Parliament website.
Public Business is the main business of the day that follows questions, urgent questions and statements.
A proposal for new legislation that is debated by Parliament.
