Thursday, 31 August 2023

Make pet abduction a specific criminal offence:

Please sign and share this important UK Government Petition which is open until 28th December 2023.

The Government responds to all petitions that get more than 10,000 signatures and a response is currently awaited as this has been reached, at 100,000 signatures, this petition will be considered for debate in Parliament.

Sign Here - https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/640101

Petition Text:

Pets are family. Their abduction a traumatic experience. Despite this, stolen pets are regarded as personal property, with sentences dependent on monetary value. The Government should recognise the emotional & welfare impacts this crime has on people & pets by introducing a 'pet abduction' offence.

Pet Theft Reform has been campaigning to make pet theft a specific offence with access to appropriate custodial sentences since 2018. Four petitions in four years - each triggered parliamentary debates, with a total of 684,970 signatures.

Following a recommendation from the Pet Theft Taskforce, the Government added pet abduction ("taking of pets") to the Animal Welfare (Kept Animals) Bill in November 2021.

The Government dropped the Kept Animals Bill in May 2023.

Wednesday, 30 August 2023

Animal Welfare (Responsibility for Dog Attacks) Bill presented:

 This is a Private Members' Bill (under the Ten Minute Rule) which is sponsored by Anna Firth Conversative MP.

A Bill to amend the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to require a person in charge of a dog to take all reasonable steps to ensure that that dog does not fatally injure another dog; and for connected purposes.

https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3466 To Be Printed-Bill 132.

This Bill had its 1sr reading in the Commons in May 2023 and the 2nd reading is currently scheduled to take place on 24th November 2023.



Further details from the 1st reading:

That leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to require a person in charge of a dog to take all reasonable steps to ensure that that dog does not fatally injure another dog; and for connected purposes.

Britain is undoubtedly a nation of dog lovers, with recent estimates suggesting that there are 13 million dogs in the UK. In other words, almost half of all households probably have a dog. For many, a dog is not just a pet but a much-loved member of the family. Certainly, my predecessor, Sir David, loved his two pugs, Lily and Bo. My own cavapoochon, Lottie, is a much-loved member of our family.

Research shows that companionship is the most common reason for having a dog. That was absolutely the case for my constituent Michael, who is with us in the Public Gallery. Michael lost his long-standing girlfriend unexpectedly and suddenly to epilepsy, so, after her death, he adopted her beautiful, white, fluffy, bichon frisé bitch Emilie—known affectionately as Millie—both to keep him company and to help him grieve.

Emilie was a wonderful dog. She was gentle, sweet and obedient, and she totally captured Michael’s heart. However, 18 months ago, Emilie was savagely attacked by an off-lead, out-of-control dog while on a walk through the rose garden in Chalkwell Park, Leigh-on-Sea. Michael described the attack as like watching a horror movie. The dog came at Emilie like a missile and, although she was on her lead, “shook her like a rag-doll”.

Michael found himself helpless to stop Emilie being torn apart in front of his eyes. After the attack, he had no option but to carry Emilie, bleeding and with serious open wounds to her abdomen, to the nearest vet, where sadly she was put down. Outrageously, the owner of the dog that attacked Emilie refused to take any responsibility —not even paying the vet’s bill for euthanasia.

No dog owner or dog should have to go through what Michael and Emilie experienced. I believe that we would all be devastated if that happened to our own pet dog, but we would be doubly devastated if, on reporting the matter to the police, we were told that there is nothing they could do as it was simply dog on dog. Yet that is exactly what happened to Michael. That is why I am introducing the Bill.

Sadly, Michael’s experience is far from unique. Since launching the Bill, I have been inundated with heartbreaking tales from dog owners all around the country. Blue the collie, Beau the Yorkshire terrier, Luath the dachshund and Ozzy the cocker spaniel are just some of the names of beautiful dogs that have been viciously killed by other dogs through no fault of their own or their owners.

The statistics back up the anecdotal evidence. After the incident, I submitted freedom of information requests to all 43 police forces in the UK asking if they record dog-on-dog attacks as a separate offence and, if so, how many they had recorded over the last 5 years. Shockingly, only 14 police forces currently record a dog-on-dog attack as a separate incident. However, in 2016 those 14 reported and recorded 1,700 dog-on-dog attacks. Since lockdown, with everyone buying their covid-19 pandemic puppies, the numbers have skyrocketed. In 2021, the same 14 police forces recorded 11,559 dog-on-dog attacks—a 700% increase—with a shocking 2,264 in London alone.

The true incidence of dog-on-dog attacks across the country is likely to be far greater, since it would be ridiculous to assume that those attacks occur only in areas where police forces happen to record them. Scaled up, therefore, there could be as many as 35,000 dog-on-dog attacks each year across the UK—and increasing. Pet insurance companies have also reported dog-on-dog attacks to be rising, resulting in vets bills running to many thousands of pounds for affected households.

Laws, both civil and criminal, have been strengthened in recent years to protect the public where a dog presents as a risk to public safety, whether in public or in private, but it remains the case that a dog owner is not liable to any form of criminal prosecution when their dog fatally attacks or seriously injures another dog, unless: the other dog is a guide, assistance or service dog; the dog bites a human; or “there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will injure any person”.

That is, quite simply, not right. Self-evidently, that is frequently not the case with a dog-on-dog attack, where so often a larger dog is making a bee-line for a smaller dog. In Michael’s case, he did not fear any injury to himself, because it was so clear that the dog was going for Emilie. Ironically, if Emilie had been stolen, not attacked, Michael’s legal remedies would have been far greater. For starters, under the Theft Act 1968, the perpetrator could have received up to seven years imprisonment. But because Emilie was brutally torn apart by someone else’s dog, nothing could be done. Not surprisingly, this leaves pet owners feeling powerless and deeply frustrated. It is also no doubt the reason why police forces do not even record such awful incidents.

Plainly, it is not the dogs that are the problem. Dogs have owners and every dog owner has a responsibility to ensure their dog does not fatally attack another one. In addition, there is a growing cohort of evidence that tackling dog-on-dog aggression and dog attacks in particular may well prevent a dog from going on and attacking other animals, adults or even children. As Benjamin Franklin so famously said:

“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”,

The Bill seeks to address all those issues. First, amending the Animal Welfare Act to criminalise fatal dog-on-dog attacks would extend the same protection to pet dogs that already exist for service, guide and assistance dogs. Pet dogs are as important to humans as service dogs. Indeed, when it comes to mental health, all dogs are service dogs.

Secondly, Emilie’s law would empower owners to pursue justice if their beloved pet is brutally attacked, while not demonising any particular breed or creating unhelpful stereotypes around certain breeds of dogs.

Thirdly, the Bill would encourage responsible dog ownership and animal welfare. Placing the responsibility for a fatal dog attack fairly and squarely on the person in charge of the dog, and empowering the police to take action, will have a deterrent effect, thus encouraging more responsible dog ownership.

Finally, the Bill would compel local police forces to record dog-on-dog attacks as separate offences, so that, finally, the full scale of these awful offences can be seen and counted. Passing this law would be a significant step in the right direction, but its effectiveness will depend heavily upon enforcement, so we must continue to work closely with the police and law enforcement agencies to ensure offenders are brought to justice.

I am well aware that most private Member’s Bills never make the statute book, but I am hopeful that this one will. It would certainly be extremely popular if it did. Emilie’s law has already garnered a huge amount of public support. However, if the Bill does not make the statute book, I would urge the Government to initiate an immediate review of existing laws regarding dog attacks, with a view to amending the current law to protect pet dogs in a similar way to service, guide and assistance dogs.

The Bill is about protecting the 13 million dogs across the country. Most dog owners are responsible, but there must be consequences for the small minority who are not. This is about dealing with that small minority who irresponsibly allow their dogs to kill other people’s dogs. By passing the Bill, not only will we help to make all dogs more secure, we will also make our parks, our streets, our towns and our cities, especially the new city of Southend, safer places for us all to live, work and visit.

Question put and agreed to.

Ordered, That Anna Firth, Wayne David, Elliot Colburn, Henry Smith, Mr Mark Francois, Sir Oliver Heald, Jane Stevenson, Selaine Saxby, Gareth Johnson, Margaret Ferrier, Damian Green and Peter Gibson present the Bill.

Monday, 31 July 2023

Electric Shock Collars Ban - England

Animal Welfare (Electronic Collars) England Regulations:

New regulations come into force on the 1st February 2024 and will ban the use of remote-controlled electronic shock collars on dogs an cats in England.


DEFRA Explanatory Notes:

These Regulations make provision for the purpose of preventing the use of electronic collars in England.

Regulation 2(1) makes it an offence for a person who is responsible for a cat or dog to attach an electronic collar, or cause an electronic collar to be attached, to the cat or dog in England.

Regulation 2(2) provides that a person commits an offence if, at any time when the person is responsible for a cat or dog, the cat or dog is wearing an electronic collar and the person is in possession of a remote-control device in England which is designed or adapted for activating and controlling the electronic collar remotely.

Regulation 3 provides that the offences under regulation 2 are summary-only offences and that a person convicted of an offence under regulation 2 is liable to a fine.

Regulation 4 provides that a local authority may prosecute an offence under regulation 2 and regulation 5 provides for various post-conviction powers in the Animal Welfare Act 2006 (c. 45) to be exercisable in relation to the offences under regulation 2.

A full impact assessment has not been produced for this instrument as no, or no significant, impact on the private, voluntary or public sector is foreseen.




Thursday, 27 July 2023

Early Day Motion on DDA 1991

EDM 1159 is sponsored by Wayne David MP:

Has your MP viewed the EDM and put their name to it?

EDMs are used to put on record the views of individual MPs or to draw attention to specific events or campaigns. Topics covered by EDMs vary widely.

By attracting the signatures of other MPs, they can be used to demonstrate the level of parliamentary support for a particular cause or point of view.

EDM 1159:

This House is concerned at the increasing number of dog attacks and is alarmed that 13 people have been killed as a result of a dog attack since the start of 2022 and more have been seriously injured; notes that the cost to the NHS of dog bites has been calculated at £777 million per year; recognises that an approach based on breed specific legislation has failed and that the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is woefully ineffective; looks forward to the publication of recommendations by the Government’s Responsible Dog Ownership working group and calls for this to take place before the summer recess; and further calls on the Government to introduce new legislation covering all aspects of the control of dangerous dogs that protects the public, promotes responsible dog ownership and improves animal welfare.






Thursday, 29 June 2023

Animal Welfare Bill Officially Withdrawn



The Animal Welfare (Kept Animals) Bill has been dropped by the Government - who have given the following statement:

Given the successful progress so far in this Parliament of so much single-issue legislation and the pressures that the original Bill faced from broader interests beyond the original manifesto commitments, we will be taking forward measures in the Kept Animals Bill individually during the remainder of the Parliament - the most effective route possible.

We are committed to cracking down on puppy smuggling. We will ban the imports of young, heavily pregnant or mutilated dogs. Applying strengthened penalties will help send a clear message that animal cruelty will not be tolerated and will enable our courts to take a firmer approach to cases where pets are illegally imported.

We’ve also taken action to tackle the practice of puppy farming. Following the introduction of Lucy’s Law in 2020, everyone must now buy directly from breeders or consider adopting from rescue centres – a major step in stopping the illegal pet trade. If an individual sells puppies or kittens without a licence they could receive an unlimited fine or be sent to prison for up to 6 months.

We also have one of the most rigorous pet travel border checking regimes in the world. Every dog travelling into Great Britain on approved routes has its microchip and paperwork checked to make sure they are all properly vaccinated and old enough to travel.

Farming Minister Mark Spencer said:

In this country, we pride ourselves on our high standards of animal welfare, and we have introduced powerful laws to maintain them.

We are delivering on our manifesto promises and continue to explore ways to enhance our position as a global leader on animal welfare.

We are also supporting Private Members’ Bills currently before Parliament banning the import of detached shark fins, banning the import of hunting trophies and banning the advertising and offering for sale here of unacceptably low animal welfare activities abroad.

Action we’ve already delivered on animal welfare since 2010 includes:

  • Recognised animal sentience in law and introduced accountability to Parliament for how well all government policy decisions pay due regard to the welfare needs of animals.
  • Ramped up enforcement with:
      • Increased maximum sentences for animal cruelty from six months to five years’ imprisonment.
      • New financial penalty notice powers in addition to other existing penalties under the Animal Welfare Act 2006.
      • New protections for service animals with ‘Finn’s Law’.
  • Raised farm animal welfare:
      • Launched the Animal Health and Welfare Pathway with new annual vet visits and grants.
      • Implemented a revised welfare at slaughter regime and introduced CCTV in all slaughterhouses.
      • Banned traditional battery cages for laying hens, permitted beak trimming via only infra-red technology.
      • Raised standards for meat chickens.
  • Significantly enhanced companion animal welfare:
      • Revamped the local authority licensing regime for commercial pet services including selling, dog breeding, boarding, animal displays.
      • Banned the third party puppy and kitten sales with Lucy’s Law.
      • Made microchipping compulsory for cats and dogs.
      • Introduced offences for horse fly-grazing and abandonment.
      • Introduced new community order powers to address dog issues.
  • Provided valuable new protections for wild animals:
      • Banned wild animals in travelling circuses.
      • Passed the Ivory Act which came into force last year, including one of the toughest bans on elephant ivory sales in the world, and extended it to five further species.
      • Gave the police additional powers to tackle hare coursing.
      • Banned glue traps.
      • Supported the Private Member’s Bill currently before Parliament banning the import of hunting trophies.
      • Supported the Private Member’s Bill currently before Parliament banning trade in detached shark fins.
      • Supported the Private Member’s Bill currently before Parliament banning the advertising and offering for sale here of unacceptably low animal welfare activities abroad


New Microchipping Regulations come in:

 

THE MICROCHIPPING OF CATS AND DOGS (ENGLAND) REGULATIONS 2023

The 2015 Regulations came into force on 24 February 2015 and introduced the compulsory microchipping of dogs. 

Since 6th April 2016, in England, all keepers of dogs that are older than eight weeks have been required to have their dog implanted with a microchip. 

The details of the dog and the keeper’s contact details are to be recorded on a database that complies with specified legislative requirements. 

Breaches of the requirements in respect of microchipping are enforced in accordance with the regulatory regime set out in the 2015 Regulations.

 This instrument revokes the 2015 Regulations. 


It replicates its provisions and extends the obligation in respect of microchipping to cats over 20 weeks of age, resulting in equivalent provisions in respect of the microchipping of cats and dogs. 

The obligation to microchip a cat comes into force on 10th June 2024. 

The instrument also makes minor and technical drafting changes where provisions replicated in it did not adequately set out the policy intent.

The new legislation can be viewed here.




Tuesday, 30 May 2023

New Public Consultation Launched:

Introducing penalty notices for animal health and welfare offences in England:

DEFRA are seeking your views on the government’s proposed implementation of penalty notices for animal health and welfare offences in England.

This Consultation is open until 20th July 2023

Online Survey Here



DEFRA want to know your views on the scope of animal health and welfare offences that could be covered by penalty notices and elements on how the penalty regime might work in practice to ensure the guidance is clear and transparent to enforcers and the general public and write:

In April 2022, the Animals (Penalty Notices) Act “the Act” was passed in Parliament. The Act provides the powers to introduce penalty notices in England for relevant animal health and welfare offences (and in Wales for offences under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991). 

The Act states that the Secretary of State may through regulations, prescribe offences as relevant offences for the purposes of this Act. 

The Act requires the Secretary of State to make regulations to ‘switch on’ the penalty notices option for relevant offences under the primary legislation listed in the Act itself and all secondary legislation made under those primary legislation. 

We are consulting on two elements:

 1. Which range of offences could be “switched on” and be under the scope of the penalty notices regime 

2. How penalty notices will work in practice. 

We believe that these new and proportionate financial penalties for animal health and welfare offences could add to, and complement, the current enforcement regime to support early behaviour change to promote compliance and better protect the nation’s animals.