LTB 142/12 CWU 'Bite Back' Campaign Update

[TrueBlueTerrier]

29 February 2012
LTB 142/12 CWU 'Bite Back' Campaign Update - Wales Government - Dangerous Dogs Legislation Review & Welsh Assembly debate on Dangerous Dogs - Wed, 8 F

No. 142/12

Ref P18/12
Date: 29 February 2012

To All Branches




Dear Colleagues,



Re: CWU 'Bite Back' Campaign Update - Wales Government - Dangerous Dogs Legislation Review & Welsh Assembly debate on Dangerous Dogs - Wed, 8 February 2012

Further to LTB 1002/11 issued on 25 November 2011 and my earlier report, detailed discussions and correspondence have taken place with Wales Government Ministers and Senior Civil Servants, resulting in very positive developments. Concerted lobbying of the 60 Welsh Assembly Members and political campaigning have taken place over the last 3 months culminating in a recent programme of engagements over two days in Cardiff, engaging with all four political parties in the Assembly and Assembly Members.

On 7th and 8th February a series of meetings took place with various interested parties.

From the start of our 'Bite-Back' our closest supporting organisation and in effect, campaign partner has been the RSPCA. Contact and a working relationship has been established with RSPCA(Wales) who have guaranteed their full support.

The Union's Lawyers Simpson Millar (Cardiff) Office have taken a very keen and supportive interest in the campaign and ongoing contact has been established with Simpson Millar agreeing to support our Wales campaign.


Cardiff North Assembly Member Julie Morgan (AM) has taken a particular keen interest in the subject of Dangerous Dogs and I have been working closely with Julie Morgan AM and her excellent support team. Like so many politicians around the Country, Julie first became involved in this issue in a political sense after a constituent Mr Dilwar Ali approached Julie after his 6 years old son Erfan was attacked and severely injured by a neighbours dog, which broke down an adjoining fence and attacked him in his own garden and home. Several productive meetings have taken place with Julie Morgan and her team to plan and initiate the Wales campaign. On the 8th February Julie Morgan
secured a time-slot for a debate on Dangerous Dogs debate in the Welsh Assembly and assistance in the preparation for the debate was provided by way of briefing and information. The Debate went extremely well, receiving cross party backing and Government support from the Minister in a very positive statement.
Meetings have also taken place with Dilwar Ali, father of 6 years old son Erfan Ali who was attacked, severely injured and could have been killed by a neighbours powerful Rhodesian Ridgeback dog. Dilwar has given his full backing to the 'Bite-Back' campaign and joint campaigning has been taking place.

On the 8th February a lengthy meeting took place with the Wales Minister for Environment and Sustainable Development John Griffiths along with his team of senior Civil Servants. I discussed with the Minister in detail the ineffective and inadequate Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 and shortcomings of the Dogs Act 1871. The Minister was pressed to think along the lines of Wales pursuing the matter in the same way as Scotland and Northern Ireland i.e. introducing legislation for Wales rather than press Westminster to act for both England and Wales, bearing in mind the problems with Westminster presently! We discussed extending the Law to apply everywhere including private places, new preventative measures through dog control notices, compulsory microchipping for better traceability, owner identification and stray repatriation, enforcement and sentencing, compensation orders and third party insurance issues, rules on seizing dogs, breed specific legislation and 'deed not the breed' approach, the need for proper dog obedience training, care and socialisation from an early age.A consolidated bill was also discussed along with the significant and growing problem of irresponsible, gligent owners with powerful dogs displaying aggressive behavior toward humans and attacking humans with serious consequences by way of physical and psychological injuries and deaths. We agreed on the need for well structured and enforced Dog Control legislation which will make individual owners responsible and accountable for their dogs' behaviour.

Later in the day on the 8th February I gave a presentation on Dangerous Dogs to Assembly Members (AMs) and their researchers and support staff from all political parties which was well attended and well received following which I met several AMs and their staff for one to one talks and answered questions. Dilwar Ali whose six-year-old Erfan Ali was attacked and severely injured by a neighbour's dog in his own back garden and home last September accompanied me to this meeting and my meeting with the Minister. The little boy was and badly bitten on his face and arms and will need specialist plastic surgery and treatment for many years to come. The family are being represented and assisted by the CWU's lawyers Simpson Millar.

Rounding off the day, the Welsh Assembly Dangerous Dogs debate took place on the evening of 8th February which concluded a very productive two day work and progress on the campaign trail to get the Wales Government to follow both Scotland and Northern Ireland in replacing the ineffective Dangerous Dogs Act with new Legislation on Dog Control and irresponsible owners. See below a copy of the official verbatim report of the debate. You can also watch the debate on this
link: http://www.senedd.tv/archiveplayer.jsf? ... 16303&l=en" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Notably, in the debate on 8th February, the Wales Minister for Environment and Sustainable Development John Griffiths said in his speech responding to the debate: "It is an area in which the Welsh Government can act and in which I am keen to see early progress." "The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is widely considered to be an inadequate piece of legislation." "Not having protection on private premises is a significant gap that we need to deal with." "We can work effectively with all of the organisations that have a key interest in this and build a consensus on what needs to take place." "We will look at what happened in Scotland". "I am heartened by the degree of common ground that exists across parties and across les and we have the powers to make timely and early progress on them. I very much want to work with Members to ensure that that happens."

I told everyone I met in Wales not only about the CWU Bite-Back Campaign but importantly about our "Campaign Coalition" of supporting organisations that it consists of including the Animal Welfare Charities, The Vets, The Unions, Police, Dog Wardens, The Nurses, The Employers, Lawyers etc etc.

Finally, I discussed with Julie Morgan's team a planned major Dangerous Dogs event to raise the profile of the issue in a big way. The Main Hall in the Welsh Assembly's Pierhead Building has been booked for Wednesday 9th May 5.30pm to 8 p.m. for a meeting of sympathetic/supporting organisations, politicians, members of the public etc with Press, media, Radio and TV all informed. All Assembly Members will also be invited. All CWU Wales Branch Officers and Area Safety Reps AM Julie Morgan's team will be writing out to organisations/charities/unions/enforcers/employers etc shortly regarding the 9th May meeting inviting organisations to participate/attend the meeting or forward.
Many key interest organisations support the CWU 'Bite-Back' Campaign for the introduction of new modernised, effective, consolidated dangerous dogs legislation which addresses the shortcomings in the present laws such as measures to deal with attacks on private property, introduction dog control notices and compulsory micro-chipping. Some of the organisations on record supporting these changes are:- Communication Workers' Union (CWU); Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO); Police Federation; Metropolitan Police; West Midland Police; National Dog Warden Association (NDWA); Royal College of Nursing (RCN); Royal Society for Prevention for Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA); Dogs Trust; Battersea Dogs & Cats Home; Blue Cross; British Veterinary Association (BVA); British Small Animal Veterinary Association (BSAVA); Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS); Camden Community & Police Consultative Group (CC&PCG); Dangerous Dogs Act Study Group (DDASG); Greater London Authority (GLA); National Animal Welfare Trust (NAWT); PDSA (People's Dispensary for Sick
Animals); The Kennel Club; Wood Green Animal Shelters (Wood Green); Trades Union Congress (TUC); Unite; UNISON; GMB; Prospect; Tonbridge & Malling Council; Tendring Council; Wandsworth Council; Wakefield Council: Wokingham Council; Haringey Council; Kensington Council; Lambeth Council; Lewisham Council; Manchester City Council.
The CWU is calling for the urgent introduction of new, modern and effective Dangerous Dogs Laws, introducing changes that will:
- Extend the Criminal Law to include Private Property.
- Introduce Dog Control Notices (DCNs) giving proactive powers to Police and Dog Wardens to issue legal control orders on irresponsible owners with sanctions for non-compliance.
- Introduce Compulsory Microchipping for better traceability and owner identification.
- Repeal 'Breed Specific Legislation (BSL)' and move over to "Deed not the Breed" legislation.
- Introduce tougher punishments and increased court Penalties.
- Ensure effective enforcement by the Police and Dog Wardens.
- Beter compensation for dog attack, victims.
Further update reports of the 'Bite-Back' campaign in Wales will be published in due course.

Best Regards

Dave Joyce
CWU National H&S Officer

























Welsh Assembly debate Dangerous Dogs - Wed, 8 February 2012
Dangerous Dogs The Record The Deputy Presiding Officer: I ask those Members who are leaving the Chamber to do so quickly and quietly.

Julie Morgan: I am very pleased to present this debate today. I have agreed that Mike Hedges, David Rees, William Powell, Jocelyn Davies and William Graham can have a minute of my time to speak after I have finished. This is a good opportunity to discuss this important issue.



I have used the title 'Dangerous Dogs', although the measures I will propose and discuss address the needs of all dogs. I am a dog lover myself; I have always had dogs and my family has had dogs since our children were little. So, I am presenting this as a dog lover and for the welfare of dogs. I am concerned about the welfare of dogs as well as the control of dogs. I entitled this debate 'Dangerous Dogs' because I first became involved in this issue in a political sense after the six-year-old son of one of my constituents, Dilwar Ali, was attacked by a dog in his own garden and home last September. The little boy was badly bitten on his face and will need specialist treatment for many years. His father came to me and said that he wanted me to try to change the law so that it was less likely that anything like this would happen again. Since then, I have been involved in discussions with the Kennel Club, the RSPCA, the Dogs Trust and the Communication Workers Union, and with David Joyce in particular, who has worked so hard for the postwomen and men whom he represents in that union. He told a meeting of us at lunchtime today of the problems that postmen and women have. He said that 12 members of his union are attacked every day by a dog and that, last week, eight members had their fingers bitten off. So, that brings home to us the real dangers faced by people who have to go out to houses.



My first proposal is that there should be compulsory microchipping of all dogs. I know that this has been discussed as part of the current consultation on the breeding of puppies in farms. This is an easy procedure to carry out, it is a safe and painless way to permanently identify pets, it will have the advantage of uniting lost dogs with their owners, it will resolve ownership disputes and reinforce the responsibilities of the owners. The primary aim of microchipping is the reunification of a lost animal with its owners. However, it will have the additional advantage of linking offending dogs to their owners in order to establish responsibility. The success of compulsory microchipping will depend on an up-to-date database and accurate records. Databases must have dog owners' details in order for reunification to take place. The cost of microchipping varies throughout the country and the issue of cost needs to be addressed. However, reduced fees or free microchipping are already available for some households. If we move to compulsory microchipping, we must look at cost.



Many countries have already introduced compulsory microchipping. These include European countries, as well as Canada, Australia, Hong Kong, Japan, Israel and others. Regional governments have also introduced compulsory microchipping. In the EU countries where compulsory microchipping has been introduced, there is a high compliance rate of 70% to 95%. I hope that Wales will be able to join that list.


However, compulsory microchipping by itself is not enough. There needs to be a shift from concentration on the breed of dogs to responsible ownership. It is generally recognised that the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 has proved to be a bad bit of legislation, put through in a rush in an emotional response to high-profile tragic incidents. Since it was introduced, there has been an increase in general irresponsible dog ownership, in bites and street dog fighting, and a big increase in stray dogs. Despite banning four breeds, it has not reduced the number of pit bull terriers in this country and, in fact, the number has grown. Demonising certain breeds has the danger of making them attractive, particularly to young people perhaps, and interesting research on this has been done by Cardiff University.

The Kennel Club believes that a dog is only as good as its owner, and any dog has the potential to be dangerous. In the same way, any dog has the potential to be a lovely pet, and we know how important animals are to people and how dogs are such friends to elderly people. Many elderly people depend on their animals, and children love their pets. I am glad to go home and see my dog. The relationship between an owner and a pet is a strong one. However, it is essential that dogs receive training, socialisation and exercise, and the emphasis in any new law must be on the responsibility of owners and the prevention of the horrific attacks that we know about and are experienced. We must look on dog ownership as a great benefit to society, but we also know that it brings dangers. We must look after young vulnerable children, like my constituent's son, and do all that we possibly can to stop anything like that ever happening again.



I hope that the Welsh Government, with animal welfare now within our powers, will introduce a Bill to tackle these issues. There must be genuine prevention. Concentrating on breeds is not effective-it is the deed, not the breed, as the Kennel Club says. The police spend money and resources on enforcement of the Dangerous Dogs Act, seizing dogs because of their breeds, but it would be much better to concentrate on all dogs that show unprovoked aggression. We all need to identify these dogs at an early stage, and I ask the Minister to look at the new dogs law that has been introduced in Scotland, and at the Dog Control Bill, which is a private members Bill being introduced in the House of Commons, having been through the House of Lords successfully.



There are many issues that must be tackled in any Bill, if we are able to bring one forward, and I will not go into detail on them now. However, a key issue is that the Bill must cover all places, including private property. Many of the postmen and women that we have discussed have no defence, because a lot of these attacks take place on private property. That is an issue that has been pressed strongly by the Communication Workers Union. There must be prevention, education and training.



I want to end my contribution now to give others a chance to get in by saying that when this horrific attack happened to my constituent Dilwar Ali's son, I felt that I had to do all that I possibly could to see that we minimise the chance of that sort of event happening again. That is why I have brought forward this short debate, and I hope that it will lead to a campaign in the Assembly and Wales to improve the Dangerous Dogs Act.



The Deputy Presiding Officer: I have five Members who want to speak, so let us keep the contributions focused and brief.


Mike Hedges: I thank Julie Morgan for allowing me to say a few words. It is not just postmen who are being bitten, but political campaigners, including my predecessor, Val Lloyd, who was bitten on at least two occasions. I fully support compulsory microchipping. We will not be the first people to do it. The technology works. It was a huge mistake to end dog licensing, as people used to know who owned the dogs. The licensing ended because it raised less money than it cost to run, but the reality was that it did a good job. We need to know who owns dogs when they get lost or when they are running wild. I hope that the microchipping of dogs is something that can be introduced by the Assembly.

David Rees: I thank Julie Morgan for letting me speak. I would like to say at the start of my contribution that I concur with everything that she said in her speech. I would like to focus on just two points. The first is education. We have to ensure that we educate anyone who purchases a dog regarding the responsibilities they have as a dog owner. It is vital that, as part of the discussion on the Minister's Bill in relation to dog breeding that we look at introducing a requirement for any dog breeder selling a dog also to sell on the information regarding the responsibilities as a consequence of that.



We also need to look at the 1991 Act, which is a shambles. Perhaps we need to go back to the 1871 Act as a starting point. If we are looking at that, I have concerns regarding points in relation to criminality, responsibility-or irresponsibility-and accidents, so that we ensure that those who are responsible for criminal acts suffer the consequences but perhaps there should be a difference regarding those responsible for accidents. The 1991 Act does not differentiate at all on that.



William Powell: I thank Julie Morgan very much for bringing forward this important debate. I support the compulsory microchipping of dogs. One thing in particular that Julie touched upon in her opening remarks is very important, which is that there needs to be an up-to-date database. This is absolutely critical. I have spoken to a couple of dog wardens in two local authorities in Wales and the suggestion is that up to 50% of the microchips that they scan when dogs are passed to them are out of date. Therefore, we need to build that into any legislation that follows. That is absolutely critical. I also urge the Minister to consider the possibility of making the dog warden service a statutory service, because that clearly has a major role to play in this area. I think that that needs our consideration.


Jocelyn Davies: I fully support the idea of the compulsory microchipping of dogs. I should declare an interest, because I am a dog owner. I do not particularly like dogs, apart from my own, and, to be honest, I am nervous and afraid of most of them and I could never have delivered mail; political leaflets are bad enough and no-one with a dog in the garden has ever had a Plaid Cymru leaflet from me.

Julie, you mentioned earlier that the procedure is easy, which it is. We took our dog to the vet to have it done and it was quite cheap; it cost £1, because our dog was having other inoculations at the same time. I am sure that any responsible dog owner would want to do that. Although we ought to acknowledge that that is not the entire solution, it is a good start.



William Graham: I congratulate Julie on this debate, which has raised some very important points. I would like to add to the discussion by saying that I note that a YouGov survey carried out for the Dogs Trust found that 83% of the general public were in favour of compulsory microchipping. I trust that the Minister will hear that. I add to your plea that it should be free.


I would like to suggest also that the Minister might consider starting with working dogs-and by that, I mean those in the agricultural industry, hounds, and those in the security services. The most important reason for introducing microchipping is the growing problem of fighting dogs. There is an incredibly serious problem regarding this major crime in this country and other problems can be linked to this time and again. Microchipping will help with the problem if not entirely prevent it.
The Minister for Environment and Sustainable Development (John Griffiths): I would like to begin by congratulating Julie Morgan on bringing this short debate before the Assembly today on behalf of her constituent, Dilwar Ali, and his six-year-old son. I met Dilwar earlier and with Dave Joyce from the Communication Workers Union. I have seen the photographs of your constituent's son, Julie, and the injuries to postal workers. That was a sobering experience. To hear of the scale of injuries suffered by postal workers alone, as you mentioned earlier, brings home to us how big a problem this is and how urgently it needs to be effectively addressed.

So, I congratulate you, Julie, for bringing this timely short debate today on behalf of your constituent. It is an area in which the Welsh Government can act and in which I am keen to see early progress. We can take forward many issues that Members raised today. We have consulted on the dog breeding regulations and I am pleased to say that we will be in a position very quickly to have a much better system to ensure responsible dog breeding in Wales. That will be a significant step forward.



Compulsory microchipping will also benefit us in Wales. That is important for animal welfare, as Julie and others mentioned. However, that is also about responsible dog ownership and it will be a significant part of addressing these issues on the control of dogs that are dangerous. So, that is an important part of the progress that we need to make.



There are gaps in the dangerous dogs legislation, as have been mentioned. As Julie said, the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is widely considered to be an inadequate piece of legislation that has not had the effect that it was designed to have. In particular, the aspect of it that deals with the breed rather than the deed, as Julie Morgan said, is an important part of the problem that has become apparent. Not having protection on private premises is a significant gap that we need to deal with. So, I think that we can make progress in the Assembly. I am keen to take forward these measures and legislation. We can work effectively with all of the organisations that have a key interest in this and build a consensus on what needs to take place. An emerging consensus has been apparent today in the meeting that I had and in the contributions of Members.



We will look at what happened in Scotland and at the private Member's Bill in Westminster and we will look further a field to see how we can learn from good practice elsewhere. There are issues around fighting dogs, again as Bill Graham mentioned, and the quality of microchips and the database that is required. As ever, much detail will need to be dealt with as we take forward our engagement with the proposals that we will make. I am heartened by the degree of common ground that exists across parties and across organisations in Wales. I am also heartened by the offers of support, particularly in terms of the cost of compulsory microchipping, for example. We already have good offers from organisations in Wales to help meet that cost, because they are so keen to see the benefits for animal welfare and responsible dog ownership if we can introduce compulsory microchipping across the country.


Finally, I congratulate Julie Morgan once again for bringing these matters to our attention, because these issues matter to the people of Wales and we have the powers to make timely and early progress on them. I very much want to work with Members to ensure that that happens.

[brothermagrew]

He said that 12 members of his union are attacked every day by a dog and that, last week, eight members had their fingers bitten off. So, that brings home to us the real dangers faced by people who have to go out to houses.