23 Feb 2010 : Column 391W

Written Answers to Questions

Tuesday 23 February 2010

Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Animal Tracing Schemes

Mr. Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will hold discussions with the Secretary of State for Health in order to merge the Food Standards Agency's livestock traceability scheme with his Department's animal tracing schemes. [316825]

Jim Fitzpatrick: There are no plans to merge the livestock traceability work undertaken by DEFRA and the Food Standards Agency although DEFRA and the agency continue to collaborate closely. For example, Food Standards Agency official veterinarians already
23 Feb 2010 : Column 392W
make use of documentation required under DEFRA's livestock identification and movement regulations in checking the origin and identity of livestock entering slaughterhouses for human consumption.

Dangerous Dogs

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many people have (a) been prosecuted under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 and (b) received the maximum sentence for ownership of a banned dog in each year since 1998; and how many weapon dogs have been seized by police in England and Wales in each of those years. [314771]

Jim Fitzpatrick: The number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts and those fined and given immediate custody under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, England and Wales, from 1998 to 2008 (latest available) can be viewed in the following table.

Data for 2009 are expected to be published in the autumn of 2010.

Figures for the number of dogs seized under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 are not collected centrally.


23 Feb 2010 : Column 393W

23 Feb 2010 : Column 394W
The number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, England and Wales, 1998 to 2008( 1,2)
Defendants

1998 1999 2000( 3) 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008( 4)

Dangerous Dogs Act 1991

Owner or person in charge allowing dog to be dangerously out of control in a public place injuring any person

Proceeded against

434

449

458

490

537

560

597

645

703

667

675

Found guilty

239

262

260

285

300

302

350

403

458

456

481

Owner or person in charge allowing dog to enter a non-public place and injuring any person

Proceeded against

28

34

35

50

38

52

48

44

54

50

44

Found guilty

13

19

19

31

30

33

25

25

29

27

33

Offences in relation to dogs under Section 1(2)(a)

Proceeded against

6

1

2

1

6

4

15

3

2

9

4

Found guilty

5

-

-

-

3

2

14

1

1

7

4

Offences in relation to dogs under Section 1(2)(b)

Proceeded against

-

-

1

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

Found guilty

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

Offences in relation to dogs under Section 1(2)(d)

Proceeded against

7

11

9

4

3

2

2

3

1

7

16

Found guilty

2

6

6

2

2

-

1

3

-

5

15

Offences in relation to dogs under Section1(2)(e)

Proceeded against

-

2

-

-

1

-

-

1

-

-

-

Found guilty

-

1

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Offences in relation to dogs under Section 1(3)

Proceeded against

23

12

5

4

6

1

5

11

8

87

117

Found guilty

8

5

2

2

2

1

2

7

5

62

95

Offences in relation to dogs under Section 3(1)

Proceeded against

248

254

266

278

284

329

290

278

278

341

356

Found guilty

125

126

130

157

150

171

167

168

160

205

239

Offences in relation to dogs under Section 3(3)

Proceeded against

12

9

24

20

18

20

11

24

19

22

20

Found guilty

8

5

13

14

7

10

5

9

11

15

10

Offences in relation to dogs under Dangerous Dogs Act Section 4(8) and Protection of Badgers Act 1992 Section 13

Proceeded against

6

30

23

39

29

20

22

16

12

10

14

Found guilty

6

18

16

31

23

12

18

9

4

5

11

Total

Proceeded against

764

802

823

886

922

988

990

1,025

1,077

1,193

1,247

Found guilty

406

442

446

522

517

531

582

625

668

782

889

(1) The statistics relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences the principal offence is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.
(2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.
(3) Staffordshire Police Force were only able to submit sample data for persons proceeded against and convicted in the magistrates' courts for the year 2000. Although sufficient to estimate higher orders of data, these data are not robust enough at a detailed level and have been excluded from the table.
(4) Excludes convictions for Cardiff magistrates court for April, July and August 2008.
Source:
Evidence and Analysis Unit, Ministry of Justice

Next Section Index Home Page