Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The Chairman of the joint committee, Deputy Cahill, left me with this job. He will not be impressed.

Over the six days, the committee was grateful to hear from a range of stakeholders, including Dogs Trust Ireland, the Dublin Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the Veterinary Council of Ireland and officials from the Departments of Agriculture, Food and the Marine officials and Rural and Community Development. In the absence of the Deputy Cahill, I thank everyone who came before the committee to share their expertise on all of these matters. On foot of its hearings, the committee published a report containing 13 observations and recommendations. It is good that we are having the opportunity to discuss those recommendations this evening.

One of the main points raised by all of those who attended the hearings - this was also raised by committee members - is the fact that the five existing items of legislation that relate to canine welfare come under the remit of the Departments of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and Rural and Community Development and local authorities. There appears to be widespread acknowledgement of that and support for the view that all policy and legislation should come under one Department. The committee has recommended the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine should be given responsibility in this regard, particularly in view of the fact that it is responsible for general animal welfare. That is a recommendation that should be taken on board. That can be done quite easily.

One of the issues the committee considered and received evidence on was that of ear cropping. The committee has recommended that there be a ban on owning dogs with cropped ears. The committee noted there would be a requirement for a time of amnesty in relation to this matter and that the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine should run information campaign to inform the public of the impact that this procedure has on the well-being of dogs.

The committee also looked at canine fertility services. Quite serious issues were raised in respect of this matter. Canine fertility services should be regulated in order to prosecute illegal occurrences of such practices. This is an important recommendation and it comes with the committee's call for a complete ban on surgical artificial insemination. The latter is also an important recommendation from the committee.

During the hearings, clear evidence was presented to the committee to the effect that microchipping has made a huge difference in Ireland. The number of dogs being microchipped has been increasing year on year. However, those who appeared before the committee raised an issue regarding information corresponding to dogs on the system and the fact that such information can cause problems in some cases, especially when it comes to efforts to reunite dogs with their families. The committee had heard from a number of organisations in respect of this matter and has recommended that there is a need for standardisation of the quality of information that is being inputted into the microchip system and that all relevant details need to be included. Another point that was made is that the full addresses of dog owners are not being uploaded to the system. We would encourage that full addresses and, where possible, Eircodes be used in order to make it as easy as possible to identify dog owners.

The committee was informed that there are currently four microchip databases in Ireland. The committee has recommended that the information on those databases be collated and stored in one central online portal that would be held by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and that authorised officers and canine welfare organisations should be able to access this.

The next recommendation is on the dog licensing system. That was described by a number of people who came before the committee as utterly inadequate. We are asking that the Government and these Houses work to pass the Animal Health and Welfare (Dogs) Bill 2022, which will address the issues relating to the current dog licensing system.

On advertisements, in particular those relating to the sale of dogs, the committee has recommended mandating all online platforms that sell dogs to incorporate a two-step verification system in their advertisements and also that an advertisement information campaign would be conducted so that people are better educated on how to spot a verified advertisement and what steps you should take when purchasing a dog to ensure that you are purchasing a dog from a legitimate source.

Local authorities are responsible for the operational oversight of the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010. Each local authority maintains its own register in that regard. The committee has looked at this and recommends that all local authorities make their register of dog-breeding establishments readily available online and accessible to the public. It was stated that some local authorities do not have this database easily accessible on their websites. This was an issue of importance to those who appeared before the committee. It is a recommendation that can be easily implemented by local authorities to make sure that everyone in the local authority has the database readily available and that those who need to can access it.

The committee also looked at the issue of the current ratio when it comes to breeding in dog-breeding establishments. In that regard, the committee has recommended that there be a maximum limit on breeding permitted in these establishments and that should be introduced to ensure a better quality of life and better quality of welfare for the dogs. It was also recommended in relation to those establishment that the Department of Rural and Community Development guideline to ensure the human interaction and socialisation of the dogs is enforced. It was stated that this is not happening in some cases.

Of importance, albeit not a recommendation in this report but having become more of an issue, is the number of sheep being attacked by dogs. There has been a growing number of dog attacks. The Irish Farmers Association, IFA, has stated that every year between 3,000 and 4,000 sheep are killed in dog attacks. There is very much a feeling out there, particular among the farm organisations and sheep farmers, that not enough has been done in order to make sure that this is wiped out as much as is possible. The IFA has repeatedly called for changes to legislation, tougher sanctions for those who fail to have their dog under control at all times and a single national database for all dogs in the country that identifies the person responsible for the dog.

That is why it is so important those changes are made to licensing. We have been told the existing licensing system is inadequate. That is why it is important that we make the necessary changes and pass legislation that can make the system more efficient. The passing of the Animal Health and Welfare (Dogs) Bill will also seek to address the issue of dog attacks insofar as possible. I understand it is currently in the Seanad. I ask the Government to consider moving it along more quickly than it has been moving to date.

The committee report contains 13 recommendations and observations. I think everyone in the House will agree, especially those who have a dog at home, that dogs are an important part of households and families. It is important that their welfare is looked after, the existing legislation is enforced and the welfare of dogs and other animals is to the fore for those who are lucky enough to own a dog.

I am glad to have had the opportunity to speak about this report and I hope its recommendations will be taken on board, primarily the recommendation that overall oversight, legislation and policy be the responsibility of one Department. We are seeking that it would be the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. That is one recommendation that could be implemented easily. Rather than having two Departments and local authorities throughout the State involved, one Department should take responsibility. That would mean we would work much more effectively on dog welfare legislation and policy.

See this speech in context