Ennvironment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee Written evidence submitted by Jaqi Bunn

1. Do Defra’s draft clauses translate the Government’s intentions on dog control into clear, proportionate, and effective legislation?

1.1 Only partially. There has been a failure to bring all dog-related legislation together under one Act, which would have made it much clearer for those not working within in the legal profession.

1.2 Thankfully it does appear to have taken into account some of the issues raised in the EFRA consultation, ie the attacks on assistance dogs and forcing the court to consider the temperament and behaviour of a dog as well as the character of the owner before making judgement.

2. Do the proposed measures provide a sufficient legislative base to tackle irresponsible dog ownership?

2.1 No, unfortunately the proposed measures fail to provide a sufficient legislative base to tackle irresponsible dog ownership.

2.2 The Government does not appear to have listened to the vast majority of interested parties that believe that breed-specific legislation has not been effective. The proposed legislation will still allow dogs to be seized that are under adequate control and in the ownership of responsible citizens simply because they conform to a certain set of measurements. This is a grave omission, especially as, in the 2012 EFRA Consultation, 88% of respondents did not consider that type-specific legislation was effective at protecting the public and 71% believed that the provisions should be repealed.

2.3 If not, which additional measures should be brought into law?

2.4 The option of Dog Control & Welfare Notices or Orders is missing and should be included in this dog-specific legislation, not elsewhere. It has been universally agreed that education is the key to preventing many of the dog control and welfare issues we currently have; if officers had the ability to issue notices it would also be an opportunity for education, either from the officers themselves or by recommending issue-specific education such as dog training and behaviour from a certified professional who meets the standards as being laid down by The Animal Behaviour and Training Council.

2.5 Are any of the proposed measures unnecessary or counterproductive?

2.6 Allowing non-police personnel to enter private properties to seize a dangerous dog could be problematic as many local authorities do not currently have the same resources, training or equipment as the police to adequately and safely perform this function and will not be able to find the finances to bring their current staff up to standard.

April 2013