No, I think that the hon. Gentleman has got that completely wrong. It is clear from his interventions all morning that he has been struggling to understand the Bill's difficulties, although I have some sympathy with where he is coming from. Perhaps this is the best way to put it: if we really think that the owner is responsible for all his animal's actions at any time, we should be legislating to insist on proper, compulsory third-party insurance. I do not believe, however, that that is what we as a nation believe. I do not think that our constituents would want every owner to have a third-party insurance policy for their pet, irrespective of its size. The Mirvahedy case was a very clear example of where the owner could not have done anything to have prevented the accident. The question we face therefore is whether or not we should insist on insurance. If we do, we should not be amending the Animals Act 1971 by the Bill. Indeed, if the hon. Member for Hendon believes that, he should bring in his own Bill to insist on that. That, however, was never the intention, so the hon. Gentleman's characterisation of my position is incorrect. He could paint himself into corner and create the scenario that he mentioned in his intervention, but that would be wrong. I believe that we need to defend the right to take some degree of risk.
Let me provide a small example. When I took my children to learn to ride, my youngest child was not allowed to do so because it was impossible to insure him. As his parent, I think that that should be my decision, not the decision of the riding school's insurance company. However, we are where we are, and the Bill will release the riding school of that decision and give it to me as a parent. The hon. Member for Hendon may think that that is wrong, but the bottom line is that that is what parental responsibility is all about. We have to be careful not to fall too easily into what I would call a nanny state solution; we should rather give people the freedom to do what they want to do.
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 c535 
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_455358
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_455358
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_455358