Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)

I will clarify a number of things. The legislation is about all animals and that is the point. It is about bringing all animals, whether they are domestic pets, companions or used on farms or for sports, under a common standard and set of rules that are required to outline how they should be protected and the responsibility that goes with ownership of an animal.

The five freedoms referred to by the Senator are guiding lights for legislation such as this. They are freedom from hunger, thirst and malnutrition; freedom from discomfort; freedom from pain, injury and disease; freedom to express normal patterns of behaviour; and freedom from fear and distress. They are international benchmarks in drafting codes of conduct and legislation on the protection of animals. It is not a coincidence that they can be found on page 3 of the code of practice for the welfare of pigs which was published by the farm animal welfare advisory council which is linked to my Department. Good work is ongoing in this area and farming organisations are at the heart of it. Unfortunately, every now and again, we witness examples of malnutrition, cruelty or unacceptable animal husbandry practices on Irish farms, but they are becoming more rare. The farming organisations have been up-front about trying to address and eradicate such behaviour. Sometimes, for complex reasons, people are unable to look after their animals and that is when the State needs to step in and take action. That is what the legislation is about. If somebody has a pet at home that is being blatantly abused, that needs to be legislated for also. Most important, when there is deliberate and flagrant abuse of animals, for example, throwing a cat on a bonfire or cutting the tendon of a horse as part of a family feud, there needs to be a legal framework in place to send a strong signal to those who may consider mutilation and so on that they are likely to end up in jail or face a massive fine.

The section is very much about dealing with intensive farming, predominantly pigs and poultry. The Senator referred to additional bureaucracy and form filling, but what we are doing is repeating the current legislative provisions in the Bill. We are, therefore, not introducing anything new. The section he proposes to delete is contained in the Protection of Animals Kept for Farming Purposes Act 1984, one of many Acts we are trying to amalgamate in this legislation. We are reinforcing current legislation and not adding anything new, which makes sense. If somebody keeps pigs or poultry in intensive housing units, he or she has a responsibility to check them once a day to make sure their welfare is monitored. Under current legislation, he or she also has an obligation to record this in a recording system in the same way as a fisherman has a responsibility to record catches. There is an obligation on those who intensively farm and have responsibility for thousands of animals, particularly in the poultry industry, to inspect and record the condition of the animals in their care. Therefore, I am restating what is in place; there is no new additional form filling or bureaucracy. On that basis, I cannot accept the amendment.