Evidence before the Committee (Questions
680-699)
WEDNESDAY 10 SEPTEMBER 2003
680. And are there particular issues in relation
to transporting animals?
(Mrs Kisko) Yes, we do have a problem in that
if the professional dog-walker is actually unable to obtain a
licence in the area that he wants to exercise dogs, then he may
well have to transport the dogs to a further borough and obviously
that means driving his car and moving them about as necessary.
681. Again you have mentioned, and it is the
Kennel Club's principal concern, the impact of the provisions
on private dog-owners. Would you like just to expand on that.
(Mrs Kisko) We do not actually see the logic
in the argument, as the Chairman has rightly pointed out, regarding
the number of dogs. The numbers are actually irrelevant because
somebody that is walking twelve small dogs may easily be able
to control them, whereas someone with two very large dogs might
find them difficult to control, so this four to five dogs is actually
irrelevant. In fact in her letter Sarah Gladstone actually quotes
that the majority of dog-walkers might be walking anything up
to a maximum of six dogs with no problem, so again we have this
worry that the number of dogs is not the most relevant point.
682. Could you please comment upon this question
about the number of licences which may be available and the potential
limitation?
(Mrs Kisko) Yes, obviously we are concerned
in terms of the number of licences which might be available. It
is not actually clear on what basis the numbers would be determined
and it would be, in our view, unfair if a private owner was unable
to obtain a licence because the quota had expired and I think
it is fairly unlikely that a borough would be able to withdraw
a licence from a professional walker simply because somebody with
a number of dogs had moved into the area. Equally well, unlike
professional dog-walkers, it is unlikely that a private owner
who wants to be able to exercise their dogs before or after going
to work would have the option of driving to another or an unlicensed
borough.
683. We spoke previously about the conditioning
arrangements that are contained in Clause 14. I think you are
concerned that there are a number of other factors that are not
embraced in the conditioning process.
(Mrs Kisko) Certainly we are concerned about
whether or not dogs are required to be kept on a lead. This, surely,
must be the most important point since the pack instinct that
has been referred to could apply to any number of dogs. That pack
instinct, particularly if the dogs had actually dispersed across
the park, would no longer be relevant because they would not actually
be in a pack any more. Equally well, if they are all on a lead
they know they are under control. They would then definitely be
under control. Equally well, any type of lead or restraint that
ought to be used has not been spoken about and neither has either
the experience or age of the owner been mentioned.
684. Those are all things, presumably, although
they are not on the face of the Bill, that may be covered as part
of the condition.
(Mrs Kisko) One would think so.
685. Are you confident that the right people
are going to be able to deploy those skills to give effect to
what are quite detailed provisions with regard to the care of
animals?
(Mrs Kisko) Certainly if we were talking about
Wandsworth, I have absolutely no problem with Wandsworth or anything
that they are doing. The Kennel Club works extremely closely with
Wandsworth, particularly on the Good Citizen Dog Scheme and in
a lot of other areas. However, for other boroughs the suggestion
was made that if other boroughs wanted to bring this into force
they would train somebody up to bring in those conditions, but
it actually is a very specialised area. Wandsworth have developed
their dog skills, their dog expertise, over very many years, so
to simply say "We will now have dog experts" is not
actually going to be that simple. On the other hand, it would
be very straightforward simply to say "Okay, we are going
to license people from now on the basis of no knowledge."
686. MR MUNDY: Thank you very much.
Cross-examined by MR CLARKSON
687. MR CLARKSON: I am going to ask, in a minute,
about some of the letters, so I will ask you some preliminary
questions but can we make sure that in due course the bundle of
letters arrives in front you? I am going to ask you the same question,
please. The Kennel Club - it is self-evident what they are - their
beneficiary?
(Mrs Kisko) Dog owners. All dog owners and
all dogs.
688. The one that cannot speak for itself is
dogs.
(Mrs Kisko) Yes.
689. What is the mischief as far as the dogs
are concerned if this Bill goes forward?
(Mrs Kisko) In our view, a reduction in the
amount of exercise that owners will be prepared to pay for.
690. Be prepared to pay for, did you say?
(Mrs Kisko) Or that the dog will receive.
We have heard about a possible £25 fee for Wandsworth but
as David pointed out it could very easily be that the fee might
be substantially higher in some boroughs and that cost is, inevitably,
going to be passed on to the owners. There will be owners who
will not want to pay for their dogs to be walked.
691. As a philosophy of approach of the Kennel
Club, is it appropriate in broad terms to encourage people to
own dogs if they are unable to be responsible for their exercise
one way or another?
(Mrs Kisko) No, absolutely not.
692. It would be also undesirable, would it not,
if the system was to encourage dog ownership but only exercise
is undertaken by professional dog-walkers who are incompetent?
(Mrs Kisko) Of course. But I think you will
find that many dog owners, because they love their dogs and they
want to make sure that they (a) get sufficient exercise and that
it is done properly, will check out the credentials of the dog-walker
before they hand their dogs over.
693. In the ideal world.
(Mrs Kisko) No, I think actually in the real
world.
694. Does the Kennel Club have an identification
of the professional dog-walkers? Is there any code of practice
or corporate structure?
(Mrs Kisko) No, at the present time we do
not but we are addressing the issue, as David pointed out, along
with the Pet Care Trust.
695. To be fair to you, I think you have made
it quite clear to the Committee how important it is that dogs
are on a lead, on this scale of dog-walking.
(Mrs Kisko) Yes, are under control.
696. I think you said that you want dogs on a
lead.
(Mrs Kisko) We would prefer that in those
circumstances that the majority of dogs would be on a lead.
697. Why?
(Mrs Kisko) To ensure that they are fully
under control at all times and to make sure that they cannot go
rushing off. David described the elasticated lead, which is not
actually there, beyond which point a dog will simply head off
across the park. If those dogs are all on a lead where is the
problem? That problem is not addressed at all in the proposed
Bill.
698. It could, of course, be a condition of the
licence that they be on a lead. One of the fundamental bases of
promoting the legislation is that multiple dog-walkers are under
control
(Mrs Kisko) Yes, but I would say that that
is equally applicable to the private dog owner. I have had the
misfortune, and I know colleagues have had the misfortune, of
being faced with a single dog owned by a single owner which is
completely out of control and which they cannot get back. I would
say, as a professional dog-walker, that a dog-walker should be
acting professionally by making sure that he can control directly
all the dogs under his care.
699. You are pushing at an open door and there
is consensus on that. If everybody acted perfectly we would not
need legislation. Just help me with this: it is not a wholly facile
question but I just want to get quite clear what is the Kennel
Club's view. As a generality, is it easier to control one to four
dogs than it is to control five plus dogs?
(Mrs Kisko) No, it depends entirely on the
breed. Entirely.
|