Member News
Existing legislation designed to control dangerous dogs is "complete nonsense" and contributing to the rise in so-called status dogs, according to animal welfare charity Blue Cross.
Speaking to ePolitix.com, the charity's director of external affairs Steve Goody warns that current laws that ban dogs based on how they look rather than their actions only serves to "glamorise" certain breeds.
The charity is backing Lord Redesdale's Dog Control Bill, which aims to revise the raft of dangerous dog legislation and focus on "deed not breed".
"The issue is very much about how a dog is bred, reared, trained and kept; as opposed to existing legislation which focuses on what a dog looks like which intrinsically makes it dangerous, which is frankly complete nonsense," Goody says.
"Because they are banned they become attractive," he explains.
Goody argues that current Dangerous Dogs Act has contributed to significant numbers of Staffordshire bull terriers being bred with no hope or expectations of homes being found for them because there are too many.
"As a result of that we are seeing increased numbers being euthanized, left astray or abandoned," he observes.
"We are hoping the government will start to take some of the heat out of that, and change attitudes in terms of particular breeds of dogs."
Earlier this month Battersea Dogs Home revealed they had to put down 2,815 dogs last year, a third of the total number it was looking after.
The home said 1,931 of the dogs killed had been healthy, but were considered too dangerous to re-home.
Goody argues that it is "widely recognised" that the existing Dangerous Dogs Act is flawed.
"The problems escalated, the legislation as it stands just doesn't work," he says.
"It doesn't work because the legislation that was developed in 1991 was hastily conceived, hastily enacted, wasn't properly thought through and there aren't the resources in place to support it.
Despite the plight facing many status dogs in the inner cities, Goody welcomes the change in approach to animal welfare over the last ten years.
"There has been a sea change in the public's awareness with regard to the importance of animal welfare," he says.
"Generally speaking over last few years the public have become much more aware of, and engaged with, the concept of animal welfare. As a result of that the expectations on parliamentarians has increased proportionally."
He cites Tory MPs Andrew Rosindell and Roger Gale and Lib Dem communities secretary Andrew Stunell as examples of parliamentarians who have taken an interest in the issues.
For his part Rosindell introduced his own bill in the Commons in July which labelled the rise in the number of attacks on people by dangerous dogs a "national calamity".
And he welcomes the influx of new and younger MPs who he hopes may be even more "pro-active" about animal welfare.
But while Goody believes environment ministers Jim Paice and Lord Henley take a balanced approach and are "open to views" he worries the "jury is still out" on whether the coalition will be as receptive as Labour were able to be to animal welfare concerns.
"I think certainly the previous incumbent had quite a lot to say on animal welfare," he says. "Whether the current regime carries on with that remains to be seen because it's facing all sorts of issues, not least of which is costs to the public purse".
Amid planned cuts to public spending Goody is waiting to see the practical application of David Cameron's 'Big Society' before forming a judgement.
"It depends realistically on what it means," he explains. "If Big Society means we can't afford to do it so you do it on our behalf with nothing to support it in terms of resourcing, then I think that would be a concern.
"If it's a genuine concerted effort to encourage others to become proactively involved, support and work with government in a joined up way then we would certainly support that."
He is also concerned that the new government's priorities may leave some business begun in the previous Parliament unfinished.
"We all had high hopes for the Animal Welfare Act," he says. "The government made lots of promises about what they were going to do with the act to support best practise and welfare.
"But a lot of that hasn't happened because the resources aren't available and there are other priorities.
"We would have doubts as to whether elements and commitments that were made by the previous incumbents are going to be picked up as fully and as comprehensibly as we had hoped."
Animal welfare organisations such as the Blue Cross had expected secondary regulation to be brought in on the back of the act to support their work, but Goody notes there have been "no commitments" to see them enacted.
Several animal charities have today called on the government to take action to tackle the problem.
A letter send to David Cameron, Nick Clegg and acting Labour leader Harriet Harman said: "We believe that irresponsible dog ownership, whether it is allowing dogs to stray, be dangerously out of control or indiscriminately breeding them causes significant problems for the safety and welfare of both humans and animals.
"Current legislation is proving inadequate in many cases to ensure sufficient protection.
"We believe that both the provision of sufficient resources at a local level for local authorities and the police, and updated and consolidated legislation that has a genuine preventative effect, are needed to address this problem."
Have your say...
Please enter your comments below.