Dog owners facing tough new insurance regulations
This and more great articles at The Independent
Dog owners could be required to insure themselves against the risk of their
pet attacking someone, it was announced today.
Government proposals suggest forcing every dog owner to take out third party
insurance and to have their dog microchipped.
Ministers are also considering introducing New Dog Control Notices for
misbehaving animals.
The "Dogbo" orders would allow police officers and council officials
to force miscreant owners to muzzle, leash or even neuter their pets.
In extreme cases the dogs could even be confiscated and given to new owners.
The measures, part of proposed changes to the Dangerous Dogs Act, are aimed at
tackling the growing problem of vicious animals being bred for use as
weapons.
Ministers are also considering making it a criminal offence for a dog owner to
allow their animal to be "dangerously out of control".
Currently they are only breaking the law if the dog is out of control in a
public place.
The change would extend the law to private residences, and could provide extra
protection for postmen. There is also concern about the widespread use of
dogs as weapons on inner city estates.
Home Secretary Alan Johnson said: "Britain is a nation of animal lovers,
but people have a fundamental right to feel safe on the streets and in their
homes.
"The vast majority of dog owners are responsible, but there is no doubt
that some people breed and keep dogs for the sole purpose of intimidating
others, in a sense using dogs as a weapon.
The number of cases has gone up to 3,079 in 1997-8 to 5,221 last year.
Shadow home secretary Chris Grayling said: "All we've really had for the
past decade under this Government is a series of speeches and headline
grabbing announcements about the things there were going to do to tackle
problems like dangerous dog offences.
"But in the end nothing has ever happened. If Labour are re-elected in
May all we'll get is the same tired-out old approach and none of the changes
the country really needs."
But Billy Hayes, general secretary of the CWU, said: "This is a
long-overdue, but extremely welcome step.
"We've been calling for changes to the law for several years now
following some terrible dog attacks on postal workers.
"Many of our suggestions - including extending protection to private land
and issuing control notices or 'dog Asbos' - are now fully reflected in this
consultation."
Speaking on BBC Breakfast Mr Johnson said the proposal on insurance was one of
many measures set out in a consultation document.
He said: "We believe that it is time for a root-and-branch look at the
legislation underpinning dangerous dogs, and other aspects like third party
insurance, like dog control notices that we are looking at, and the idea
that you put a microchip in every dog so that you can trace them back to
their owners."
Mr Johnson said the majority of dog owners were responsible - but there had
been cruelty to animals meted out by people who had merely followed a
fashion for "status dogs".
"Is the law strong enough anyway? Already we know the Dangerous Dogs Act is
fine for where there has been an attack in a public place but not where the
attack took place where a dog was permitted to be," he said.
"Many of the attacks we have seen have been on small children, dreadful
attacks, postal workers etc in front gardens, or in the private property
itself," he said.
"The law doesn't cover that. The first point we have to look at is are the
people who are enforcing the law, not just the police, but RSPCA inspectors
as well. Do they have enough power to deal with some of these issues?"
Asked about calls from BBC Breakfast viewers for a return of the dog licence,
Mr Johnson said: "The dog licence was done away with some time ago mainly
because it cost more to collect it than it actually gained in fees.
"So there is an issue there and maybe that is an idea people want to put
forward."
Mr Straw told Sky News that there must be a way of determining who owned a
dangerous dog.
He said: "You have to have some kind of wider system of determining the
ownership of the dog. Otherwise they'll escape the law by claiming that dog
is nothing to do with them, which is why some of those other ideas of
proving ownership have come into it."
The proposals were broadly welcomed by animal groups.
A spokesman for the Dog's Trust said: "Just a third of dog owners currently
have their dog microchipped, but should this become a legal requirement more
stray dogs can be reunited with their owners, thus ultimately reducing the
9,000 dogs that are destroyed by local authorities every year.
"A recent survey conducted by Dogs Trust shows that 88% of dog owners would be
in favour of such a law."
Caroline Kisko, communications director of the Kennel Club, said: "The
Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is a knee-jerk piece of legislation which was rushed
through in haste.
"It has not reduced the number of pit bull terriers in this country, nor has
it reduced the number of dog-biting attacks while it has had a huge impact
on the welfare of many dogs.
"It is essential that any new legislation is properly considered and puts
greater emphasis on animal welfare whilst better protecting the public.
"The Kennel Club welcomes this review and we hope that any future government
will look at this pressing issue as soon as possible after the election."
Steve Goody, director of external affairs at the Blue Cross animal charity,
said: "We are pleased that the Government has responded to our calls for an
urgent review of the Dangerous Dogs Act, which has unfortunately failed to
deal with the increasing problem of dog attacks and anti-social behaviour.
"We hope this will lead to more practical and enforceable measures to control
dangerous dogs and protect the public before tragic attacks occur."
This and more great articles at The Independent |