The hon. Gentleman sets out the choice that we will face, which I shall sum up later. I agree that that is what we must decide today. Roughly speaking, we must choose whether someone in Mr. Mirvahedy's situation would in future be able to get compensation. If we wanted there to be insurance for risk caused by unforeseen circumstances, over which the owner had no control, we should not amend section 2(2) but introduce a Bill that would insist on compulsory third-party insurance, just as we do with cars. We should insist that, just as a person cannot drive their car without being insured, they should not be allowed to have an animal without insurance. That is not our intention, so the Bill would remove the question mark about whether people should have third-party cover for owning animals.
Animals Act 1971 (Amendment) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Bill Wiggin
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Friday, 14 March 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Animals Act 1971 (Amendment) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
473 c532 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 00:50:17 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_455350
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_455350
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_455350