Evidence before the Committee (Questions
480-499)
WEDNESDAY 10 SEPTEMBER 2003
480. How long have you been in the process of
promoting this Bill?
(Mr Stratton) This has been going for probably
two and a half years.
481. You mentioned that it takes about two years
to promote a by-law.
(Mr Stratton) Correct.
482. Is there any reason why those by-laws have
not been promoted in the meantime in relation to this particular
issue?
(Mr Stratton) Absolutely. As I said, we were
affected by the by-law and we felt that it would be far more responsible
to go pan-London rather than just be selfish and do it for Wandsworth.
We knew where the dogs would go, they would pop over the border,
some to Lambeth and some going north and certainly to the neighbouring
boroughs and they would be suffering exactly the same problem
we are suffering.
483. It is the case, is it not, that those boroughs
themselves can avail themselves of the by-law making power if
they have a problem?
(Mr Stratton) You are absolutely right, but
the boroughs that are slow in doing it might do this twelve years
downstream.
484. Can I make the suggestion that in fact there
is already quite adequate provision in terms of the by-law making
abilities of the boroughs to protect themselves against the sort
of concerns that your borough clearly faces and therefore there
is no immediate requirement for any additional powers contained
in clause 14?
(Mr Stratton) You talk about immediacy. If
I could have introduced this within Wandsworth two years ago I
would have done so. It has taken two and a half years to get this
far. If we do introduce this as a by-law all that is going to
happen is our next door neighbours will then have to go through
the process of trying to create their own by-laws and spend perhaps
two years in doing it and when they have achieved it the next
door boroughs will do the same. What I am trying to say is that
by having this in this particular Act those boroughs that are
affected can implement this almost instantly. By going down the
other route it might be twelve years before some boroughs get
round to doing it because they have not experienced the problem
that we have to date.
485. Can I take you to clause 14 itself, please.
Do you have it there?
(Mr Stratton) Yes.
486. We mentioned subsection (1) earlier and
I wanted to have your confirmation, please, that these provisions
will not simply apply to professional dog-walkers, will they?
(Mr Stratton) No.
487. They are intended to apply to anybody, a
private owner of animals who wishes to walk his dogs in the case
where there are more than four at any one time.
(Mr Stratton) Correct.
488. Could you please explain to me the intention
of sub-paragraph (b) because I fail to understand what or who
it is aimed at? 14(1) says that any person who carries out multiple
dog-walking without a written consent or in breach of a condition
shall be guilty of an offence. (b) says that any person who causes
or permits any person to do so shall be guilty of an offence too.
(Mr Stratton) We now have certainly two dog-
walkers who subcontract their dogs. So they collect the dogs,
they give them to somebody else and that somebody else goes off
and walks them. They then carry on doing another activity which
might be dog training or even walking dogs themselves.
489. Do you think there is any concern that that
provision might be applied to a private individual who gives his
dog to a professional dog-walker, as many people do these days,
to walk?
(Mr Stratton) No.
490. I suggest that that provision is capable
of that interpretation, but I will give that submission in due
course. Can we also make it clear of course that this provision
imposes a criminal penalty in relation to somebody in breach of
a condition on the licence or failure to have a licence. That
is right, is it not?
(Mr Stratton) Well, they would certainly be
prosecuted and appear in a Magistrates' Court.
491. Could I take you to those conditions then
and the framework, if that is the right way of putting it, for
the conditioning process and the imposition of conditions as set
out in subsection (2) and includes conditions as to the times
or period in which the consent is valid. Do you know whether that
is intended to impose some sort of time restriction or might it
impose some sort of time restriction as to when people might actually
walk their dogs?
(Mr Stratton) It certainly could if there
are too many people who are walking dogs at the same time or large
groups of dogs at the same time in a park or an open space. It
may be necessary to get them together and either individually
let them agree when they will walk their dogs, am or pm, or even
more than merely before noon, let's say between eight and ten.
492. Eight and ten in the?
(Mr Stratton) In the morning, or giving them
time slots or them arranging time slots when they can walk their
dogs.
493. Would it be possible, do you think, under
those provisions there to require someone to walk their dog after
dark?
(Mr Stratton) They would not have to. Most
people who own their own dogs walk their own dogs after dark even
though officially perhaps some of the parks and open spaces are
closed, but private owners will walk their own dogs after dark
normally in any event and early in the morning.
494. Can I take you to sub-paragraphs (d), (e),
(f) and (g) of subsection (2) which mentions that the conditions
may be imposed as the part of the place designated under the subsection
below where the consent is to apply conditions as to the number
of dogs which may be walked, conditions relating to the training
of the person carrying out the multiple dog-walking and conditions
relating to his conduct when carrying it out. Could you tell me,
please, who is the person to take the view as to what conditions
should be imposed and the nature of those conditions in relation
not just to your borough where you are well served in terms of
expert dog wardens, controllers, but in other boroughs?
(Mr Stratton) Conditions as regarding the
place will depend really on how many people have already asked
to go, for example, to Battersea Park. If there are already too
many people walking in Battersea Park and a dog-walker comes along
and asks for a licence, they will be told, "Well, Battersea
Park is now pretty well swamped out, so you will have to go and
walk your dog in another place", so that condition will be
imposed by or through the dog control unit and the park police.
495. And that would apply to a private individual,
would it not? They would be required to go to another park to
walk their animals if there was a condition to that effect?
(Mr Stratton) You refer to our borough, but
in our borough that would not happen. The residents would come
first. The professional dog-walkers would always come second and
if a person had been given a licence and then a resident appeared
and wanted to walk a large number of dogs, and we do not, I can
assure you, have very many people who have over four dogs in Wandsworth,
but if somebody did come along, we would make arrangements for
that person almost to get the pick because that is what the parks
are for, the residents.
496. Do you think that professional dog-walkers
might be aggrieved if that were your policy? (Mr Stratton)
They may be aggrieved, but as a local authority our function is
to look after, first and foremost, our residents.
497. We traversed earlier over sub-paragraph
(f), the conditions relating to the training of the person carrying
out the dog-walking. Again, we were a little uncertain and I wonder
if you can clarify exactly what you meant by training in these
circumstances. Are there people certainly in your borough who
would fulfil that function? Are they themselves capable of training
people how to walk dogs responsibly?
(Mr Stratton) That certainly is my view and
our dog control unit is very experienced. Some of them have been
there for 15 years in the same job and they know, they have been
on various courses, dog psychology courses and the like, and they
are, in my view, more than adequately capable of deciding what
level of training and what standards an individual needs to achieve
and I believe that they could take somebody out and walk with
somebody for ten or 15 minutes and probably ascertain whether
that person is capable of taking more than four dogs or five dogs.
498. It just seemed to me that when you answered
the question in your evidence you were suggesting, I think, that
rather than the actual training of people to walk dogs, you were
simply informing people of what the process was, what the condition
procedure was, that in fact those people are not trained to train
walkers.
(Mr Stratton) I would wish to see that the
dog-walkers are competent to walk their dogs or a large group
of dogs.
499. You, of course, are referring mainly to
the position in Wandsworth?
(Mr Stratton) Yes.
| 
