Matters investigated
Jump to
1. Mrs G complained that the Home Office had failed properly to regulate research undertaken by company A (the company), under the Animal (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (the 1986 Act). Specifically Mrs G contended that the Home Office incorrectly assessed the severity limits of procedures when granting licences to the company under the 1986 Act. Furthermore, she complained that the issue of drug toxicity did not appear to have been taken into account when determining the severity of procedures that were to be carried out under the licences that were granted. Mrs G also alleged that the Home Office exhibited bias and maladministration in their consideration and approval of the company’s licence applications. In addition, she contended that the Home Office’s oversight of the company’s compliance with the conditions of its licences was inadequate. Finally, Mrs G complained that a government minister gave a misleading answer to Parliament in connection with this issue. I have set out what I consider to be the essential background to the complaint in Annex A to this report.
2. Acting with the authorisation of the Parliamentary Ombudsman under the provisions of the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967, this constitutes my report of the investigation. The investigation was carried out after the Ombudsman had obtained comments from the Permanent Secretary of the Home Office following the referral of Mrs G’s complaint by the Member. I have not included in this report every detail investigated by the Ombudsman’s staff, but I am satisfied that no matter of significance has been overlooked.
