While the Department for Farming and Rural Affairs (Defra) prevaricates over the proposed Animal Welfare Bill - dubbed a "Bill of Rights" for animals in the popular press - local authorities continue to grapple with a large number of fragmented laws that have been developed over a long period of time. Consultation closed earlier this year on a number of existing acts of parliament that might apply to "animals kept by man for enjoyment, sport, companionship or farming purposes" - it excluded wildlife, zoos, dangerous wild animals and hunting with dogs. To the dismay of a number of animal rights groups, the consultation did not seek to deal with the welfare of animals used in scientific research either.

By Defra's own admission, legislation for domestic or captive animals is perceived by many parties as being "confusing, unwieldy and outdated". Some of the questions that Defra seeks answers on include: Should there be greater regulatory control over public and private pet fairs?; should there be greater controls over the buying and selling of exotic or dangerous animals?; should the police's investigation and arrest powers be extended or changed?; and, should premises such as animal sanctuaries and livery stables/yards be licensed? While this lengthy process rumbles on - the consultation is simply to seek views on what such a bill should cover, and whether the Government should proceed further - a number of organisations, including the CIEH, are urging the Government to forge ahead with the proposals to consolidate the animal welfare laws into a single piece of legislation.

Mark Rowe looks at some of the concerns that have led to Defra's moves to update the animal welfare laws, and talks to the CIEH about the problems its members face with regard to enforcement.

On a different note, we look at the approach to Haccp and food safety regulation on the other side of the world. According to Mike Orchard, a UK-trained EHO working as a senior risk management advisor with the New Zealand Food Safety Authority, the country is pioneering a new way forward in its application of Haccp - a risk-based regulatory model that the Europeans would be wise to take note of. However, John Barrow disagrees. He believes that Haccp is a philosophy, not a standard, and that the entire concept could be damaged if the New Zealand approach is followed here in the UK. Read on and see what you think.

This month we also tackle issues related to public health and primary care. David England kicks off the debate by looking at the structure of the "new" NHS and primary care trusts and their relevance to EHOs. Calling on EHOs to "make a difference", he challenges local authorities to engage with the new PCTs to improve the health of communities at a local level. But will EHOs have a real voice in the work and direction of these trusts?

Finally, Peter Archer looks at the grim statistics behind the UK's fuel poverty phenomenon, and the links between cold and damp homes and excess winter deaths. Assessing the Government's fuel poverty strategy, he asks the burning question: "Will the strategy work?"

Finally, if there are any issues that you would like to see covered in more detail in EHJ, whether it be for future feature ideas or topics that our regular columnists - David Statham at the FSA and Julie Barratt, director CIEH Wales - could tackle, please contact me and let me know. Alternatively, join in the discussion on the Forum page. I look forward to hearing from you...

Tracey Khanna
Editor