What next for the Dog Control Bill?

---

Steve Goody of the Blue Cross outlines the next steps for the Dog Control Bill, following the successful passing of report stage in the House of Lords.

What are your initial reactions to the Dog Control Bill successfully passing the report stage in the House of Lords?

We are delighted. It has passed through every stage of the Lords successfully now despite some quite heavy challenges.

I think we were hoping that there would be a third reading before the summer recess, but obviously that's not now going to be the case.

I guess there was also an element of surprise as well, in terms of it having progressed as far, and as quickly, as it has done given that it is a Private Member's Bill.

It is a Private Member's Bill that is, from the government's perspective, a potentially contentious piece of legislation – as it obviously seeks to revise the current dangerous dogs legislation.

So we were certainly surprised – but with a strong emphasis on delight.

Could you tell us a little more about your concerns on 'status dogs', an issue that has been championed by Lord Redesdale?

This is an interesting one and it is multi-faceted I think.

The current legislation – the Dangerous Dogs Act – does not work; it is not fit for purpose. It does not prevent people being bitten by dogs of all different types of breeds or sizes.

It does not work because it is predicated very much on the issue of breed rather than deed, so a dog that is of a particular type and looks a particular way is demonised as being dangerous. Quite often, and as we have seen most recently with the case of a labrador biting a child a few days ago, it is not necessarily these sorts of dogs that are doing the damage most of the time.

There are other failings with the legislation in terms of it referring only to a public place, not private property. There is no provision within existing legislation to do anything about preventing incidences before the incident happens, so there is nothing in there about control of the environment in which an animal is kept.

There are no controls in place regarding inappropriate ownership of these breeds of dogs by certain types of people within society. So there are some big, big failings with the existing legislation.

The other issue on status dogs in terms of concern is that this government has been totally intransigent with regard to addressing the issue of inadequate and inappropriate legislation, in spite of the fact that there was a substantial consultation, although admittedly under the guise of the previous incumbents.

There have, however, been numerous commitments by the government – by Defra, by Lord Henley, the minister responsible – that there would be some published outcomes from that consultation.

Yet here we are, over a year now into the lifetime of this particular Parliament, and we are still waiting. So there are some significant frustrations, both from the perspective of the legislation as it stands and the basic intransigence of government to seemingly do anything about the situation.

What work has the Dangerous Dogs Act Study Group undertaken in compiling and proposing the Dog Control Bill as a means of replacing existing dangerous dog legislation?

Well, I think that the first thing to say is that the Dog Control Bill is a Private Member's Bill and it is Lord Rupert Redesdale's legislation, not the Dangerous Dogs Act Study Group legislation.

For sure we have supported its development, we have worked with Lord Redesdale closely in terms of the original piece of legislation – its drafting and its subsequent amendments – but it is very much Lord Redesdale's legislation.

The Dangerous Dogs Act Study Group was established originally back in 1991/2 to seek a review of the then 1991 Act, because even then it was very apparent that the legislation was not working.

The Dangerous Dogs Act Study Group has been working very hard over the years since then to try and see a change to the current law because, as we said, it does not work.

We were delighted with the opportunity to work with Lord Redesdale in the development and support of his piece of legislation, and again delighted to see it get as far as it has.

An online petition to support the principles of the Dog Control Bill has proved a real success. Could you tell us a little more about this?

There was a lot of anecdotal evidence flying around the sector, both from welfare and from government, that the general public was against substantial revision of the act as it stood.

So what the Dangerous Dogs Act Study group did was put together an online petition, and ran it for a set period of time, challenging the notion that no-one wanted to see any change.

I'm pleased to say we received 10,000 signatures on that petition calling for substantial change and review of the legislation.

Changes called for include the removal of section one, an extension of public place to private place, and control orders being put in place for owners.

Interestingly, I know that the London mayor's office distributed a petition calling for a strengthening of the existing legislation and got far fewer signatures than did the DDASG petition.

To us, that suggested that there was a groundswell opinion out there saying to government that this legislation is not working and something proactive needs to be done about it.

What next for the Dog Control Bill and dangerous dog legislation in general?

Having passed report stage, the Dog Control Bill obviously will go to third reading, it will then pass into the Commons to start the process all over again.

It will, however, require a sponsor in the Commons to pick it up and run with it. No-one at this stage has put their hand up.

The legislation will, assuming it gets through third reading in the Lords, reach the Commons; what happens to it thereafter – I don't know. But hopefully it will continue to progress as successfully as it has done in the House of Lords.

We want the outcomes of the previous government's consultation, which this government has committed to delivering, and we want them soon.

The other important point I think, from our perspective, is that we have seen the development of the sort of legislation that Lord Redesdale has passed through the Lords in the devolved administrations.

There is dog-control legislation in Scotland. Additionally, it is proposed that there will be dog-control legislation sooner rather than later in Northern Ireland.

So the devolved administrations are actually grasping this nettle and, again, this has made us appreciate this government's intransigence to do likewise.

There obviously have been some discussions between Defra and the Home Office in terms of transferring some of the responsibility, ostensibly for dangerous dogs, to the Home Office for development of anti-social behavioural orders – DOGBOs – but that is not going to go anywhere near far enough.

We really need the government to pick up on the success of Lord Redesdale's bill, to listen to what the general public are telling them, and have told us throughout our petition, and to look at what the devolved administrations are doing.

The Dog Control Bill passed report stage in the House of Lords on Friday 10th June.