Hi all, I've had a reply to my letter, See what you make of it. Thank you for your letter regarding the Dangerous Dogs Legislation.I wrote to the minister responsible for this policy area and have now recieved a reply from Ben Bradshaw MP.I enclose a copy for your information. We are aware that some groups wish to see the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 repealed and replaced with non-breed specific legislation.However I believe that Section 1 of the DDA provides significant protection for the public from types of dog which pose a real threat to public safety.In our view these types of dog are not suitable as companion animals and should only be kept under the restrictions contained in the 1991 act.There is also considerable evidence of a major wide world trade in the banned pitbull type dogs for the purpose of dog-fighting. However,following the recent tragic dog attacks on children we have been undertaking an urgent review of the Dangerous Dogs Legislation.Our conclusion is that parts of the law particulary with regard to dog attacks in the home,maybe in need of reform.For example a court cannot fine or imprison the person responsible for a dog when an attack takes place in the home whereas it has this option if the attack is in a public place.Most other countries do not differeniate in this way and we need to consider whether the time has come to change our law. There is no simple solution to preventing dog attacks and the government does not want to rush through changes to the law that at the end of the day prove to be ineffective.We need to be clear as to the concerns of those of those at the sharp end of enforcing the law.This is going to involve us consulting widely with the police,animal welfare organisations and childrens charities before any proposals can be put before parliament.This is bound to take time but we do not want to end up being accussed of coming up with another law through knee jerk reaction rather than proper consideration. Whilst we would always encourage schemes such as the proper training of dogs,coupled with the training and education of owners,it is not an area where we think government intervention would be appropriate.The best qualified people for drawing up such a scheme and bringing it to the public's attention would be those professionally involved with the care and training of animals.This includes major welfare organisations,animal behavourists,those who train dogs used in law enforcement,and breeders.It is a large diverse group of stakeholders and my initial reaction is they would each have a different approach as to what are the key elements in responsible ownership. It will always be difficult to stop the irresponsible from acquiring dogs without also placing restrictions on those responsible people who wish to keep a dog.It is not the goverments intention to deny the pleasure of dog ownership to those many people who are responsible just because of the actions of a minority. The Animal Welfare Act 206 comes ito force in April and for the first time,place a duty on pet owners to take steps to ensure that their animals are well looked after.I accept that this will not automatically bring an end to all dangerous or unruly dogs,but I am strongly of the view that it is a step in the right direction as a dog that is properly looked after will be less likely to cause problems to society than one that isn't. With Best Wishes Ben Bradshaw.
Actually it's very well written, and there isn't much in there that was a surprise. What exactly did you expect? Becky
Erm, what on earth do they think childrens charities could offer to any sensible debate regarding dogs ??? As usual the blind leading the blind and innocent dogs pay the price.
If dog attacks in the home are not legislated for then how is the grandma being charged for manslaughter in the latest case?
This Ben Bradshaw says, "these types of dog are not suitable as companion animals". A judge in Liverpool disagrees. The law itself has an exempted dogs register, if "these types" were not suitable, why still allow them to be owned through the creation of a register. From what I've seen there, it proves that those with common sense and those without are both in agreement in that the law needs changing, where we differ is in the way it needs to be changed. They fail to realise that 16 years on from imposing the ban, it simply hasn't worked, and pit bulls are still here in great numbers and people are still being attacked by numerous breeds. No Breed should be banned, surely one day these people will see sense.
Probably not until they have done away with all dogs then they maybe they will sit there mournfully saying ` do you remember years ago when when people had dogs as pets `...
