Mary Upton (Dublin South Central, Labour)

I move amendment No. 28:

In page 89, between lines 6 and 7, to insert the following:

"(3) Where an authorised officer takes possession of or removes from the premises for examination and analysis, any animal pursuant to subsection (2)(h) which is not the property of the registered person concerned, then—

(a) the authorised officer shall take reasonable steps to notify the owner of the animal of such seizure or removal, within a reasonable time after taking possession of or removing the animal, save where it is not possible to identify the owner notwithstanding reasonable diligence,

(b) where the owner so requests, the authorised officer shall return the animal to the possession of the owner unless there are reasonable grounds to believe that the owner is responsible for serious ill-treatment or neglect of the animal, and

(c) where an animal is returned to its owner following seizure or removal under this section, the subsequent production of the animal in proceedings (including disciplinary proceedings) under this Act shall not be required, and the production of photographic or scientific evidence regarding the condition of the animal shall be sufficient in any such proceedings.".

The Minister agreed on Committee Stage that she would look at this amendment. It would protect the property rights of the owners of animals on the premises that are raided by authorised officers.

There is no difficulty with the authorised officer seizing the property of the vet because it is intended the legislation will provide for that. It is important, however, that any third party who is a client of the vet and whose animal is in the surgery at the time is protected.

The first part of the amendment states that the authorised officer is not required to get permission from the owners in advance but must notify them after the event. That is reasonable and practical. It is then up to the owner to request the return of the animal and if that request is made, the animal should be returned unless the owner is going to mistreat it.

When the animal is returned, production of the animal in court or before the veterinary council is not required and scientific evidence is satisfactory. It might be practical to bring a Manx cat but it might not be best practice to bring a Friesian cow to a court or sitting of the veterinary council.

See this speech in context