|
Members of Britain's House of Lords committee on the use of animals in scientific procedures have slammed the government for not acting fast enough to reduce the bureaucracy currently constraining scientists in the United Kingdom. In a highly critical debate in the House of Lords last Friday (October 17) the committee's chair accused the government of reacting with “complacency” to its inquiry.
The select committee published its final report in July last year, following a yearlong investigation. It stated that while the United Kingdom had the toughest regulatory system in the world for animal experiments, it was not necessarily the best, and warned that excessive bureaucracy was holding back research.
In particular, it called for the simplification of project license applications. During its evidence sessions, the committee was shown applications stretching to hundreds of pages.
The chair of the committee, Lord Smith of Clifton, told the house last week: “That is unnecessary and time-consuming and places both the United Kingdom's academia and pharmaceutical industry in an internationally uncompetitive position and, equally importantly, is deleterious to the welfare of animals.”
He criticized the government's official response to his committee's recommendations, saying it used “civil service language,” and expressed anxiety that little had been done to reduce bureaucracy in the past 18 months.
Lord Winston, professor of fertility research at Imperial College London, confirmed there was still “considerable slowness” in dealing with applications for project licenses. He urged the government to consider emulating the system currently used in the United States.
“The fact is, my experience in this country is that it takes me many months to get animal licenses,” he said. “That is unacceptable, particularly if you are working in a field which is scientifically highly competitive.”
The minister for science, Lord Sainsbury, denied allegations that the government's response had been negative. But he admitted that many of the committee's recommendations were taking longer than he would like to implement.
He acknowledged that animal license forms should be as short and simple as possible, adding that the UK's stringent regulations were necessary to generate and maintain public confidence and protect animals.
While Lord Sainsbury said the government was taking forward “all the important” issues highlighted in the committee's final report, he placed a question mark over the need for a new national center for the 3Rs (reduction, refinement, replacement).
“I do not believe that we should fall into making the mistake, which is common in these situations, of saying, 'You have a problem. The solution to it is to set up a center,'” he said. “We should not do that without examining what the center should do and what the effect would be, and why there is a difference between general scientific research and toxicity.”
An interdepartmental government group, led by the Home Office, is now considering the issue. Lord Sainsbury said the group had found there was support for a body to act as a means to publicize and coordinate what is already being done in this area. The group will present its findings to ministers early next year.
References
|
Register for FREE Online Access
Subscribe to the Magazine