Andrew Doyle (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The need for the establishment of a working group to examine legislation for the regulation of dog breeding establishments is borne out of a concern for an area that falls outside mainstream animal breeding, which is open to much abuse. In the same way as turkey and brussels sprouts farmers, many of these people see Christmas as the golden time to sell. We see what happens when dogs are given to children as Christmas presents and end up on the road, in the wild or in animal welfare pounds by the middle of January.

With that in mind, a working group was set up in October 2004. It brought together many of the people involved in dog breeding establishments to try to bring to heel those who abuse animals purely for unscrupulous commercial purposes in the same way as dog fighting, which was carried out in the past and probably continues under the radar in the black economy. The group held four meetings over a two-year period and came up with draft recommendations. Since the autumn session, I have asked the Minister when he was going to publish those recommendations and his own recommendations.

One thing was clear. In its deliberations, there were areas that were outside the terms of reference which came up for discussion, one of which is the need to introduce microchipping to assist gardaí and dog wardens in identifying animals. This may present problems for legitimate breeders who want to sell their animals abroad.

The group identified the need for but did not have the authority to recommend that the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government carry out a review of the Control of Dogs Act and that the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food carry out a review of the Protection of Animals Act and the duty of care associated with that in the same way as for mainstream farming. It also identified the need for better education. This goes back to the Christmas or birthday buzz people get from buying their children a dog they are unable to take care of. It also looked at ways of reducing the number of animals that must be put down annually by way of spaying and neutering and highlighted the need to encourage that.

We do not want to see this legislation brought in purely on foot of the recommendations because it is not the complete picture. This area is to be transferred to the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. In reality, that may not happen before these regulations are put in place. This must be brought back before the House to be debated because all of those other areas must be brought into the pot before we get proper legislation.

There are people out there who have large-scale puppy farms with thousands of animals. I am not exaggerating. If this was implemented as legislation, it would not be possible to control these people. The ISPCA says that it cannot take the animals into its care, while the gardaí say it is the responsibility of the ISPCA, which does not have the resources. If there is an outbreak of disease or other animal welfare issue affecting large animals, we are able to organise a cull for the greater good of animals and animal welfare.

We must bring the recommendations of this committee back to the House for further discussion to try to fine tune them and make it a comprehensive piece of law before it is put on the Statute Book. Is it the aim of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to bring it back here to be discussed? What is the timeframe for transferring responsibility in this area to the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food? Will the Departments of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Environment, Heritage and Local Government set up an interdepartmental think tank because that is needed? Will this happen before legislation is introduced? We do not want to see these regulations published one day, which the Minister seemingly has the right to do, without coming back here to be discussed as primary legislation.

Máire Hoctor (Tipperary North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputy Andrew Doyle for raising this issue. The role of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government relates primarily to dog licensing and controls on dangerous dogs in the interest of the protection of the public and other animals, i.e., the Control of Dogs Acts 1986 and 1992 along with associated regulations.

In the light of a number of reports about substandard "puppy farms", the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government undertook in 2006 to consider regulation of dog breeding establishments in the interest of animal welfare. A working group was established to review the management of dog breeding establishments nationally. The group, which included a cross section of people with professional and welfare involvement with dogs, produced a majority report for the then Minister with a set of recommendations. However, three minority reports were also presented by bodies represented on the working group. In light of that, a period of public consultation followed and while there was not universal agreement with the recommendations, the then Minister concluded that there was sufficient agreement that they should be implemented.

The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is currently finalising a set of draft regulations in accordance with current control of dogs legislation which will give statutory effect to most of the recommendations contained in the majority report of the working group. This majority report contained a set of recommendations which are set out as follows. It was recommended that dog breeding establishments be defined based on the number of female dogs with breeding potential present on the premises. A dog breeding establishment would be defined as "a premises containing more than five female dogs, aged over four months, with breeding potential". In respect of the funding of the regulatory system, it was recommended that the new regulatory regime be self-financing and be funded by increasing the general dog licence fee for dogs kept in breeding establishments. In respect of permanent identification, it was recommended that all dogs kept in breeding establishments, including their offspring, be electronically microchipped to ensure traceability and assist the enforcement of the registration system. The group also recommended that greyhounds be exempted where they have already met the Irish Greyhound Board's identification requirements. In respect of the transportation and export of dogs, it was recommended that the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food implement regulations for the transportation of consignments of dogs within the State and for export. These regulations would cover transportation standards, minimum space requirements, ventilation, route plans, journey durations, feeding and watering intervals. It was agreed that every dog owner and dog breeder has a "duty of care" in respect of animals kept by them and it was recommended that this be enshrined in all animal welfare legislation. In respect of lead-in time, it was recommended that the new dog breeding registration system be introduced on a phased basis using an improvement notice model to avoid the creation of a surplus of dogs caused by the closure of substandard dog breeding establishments.

Since the working group's report was issued, the Department has undertaken extensive consultation with relevant central and local authorities and a large number of interested organisations. In finalising the regulations, a comprehensive round of discussions took place between the Department and a range of veterinary, dog welfare and other interested bodies. Guidelines will also be introduced in conjunction with the regulations which will focus strongly on the welfare requirements of dogs in these establishments. These guidelines have been extensively informed by discussions with, and valuable input from, leading veterinary and animal welfare organisations.

Certification of registration of dog breeding establishments will be undertaken by local authorities as part of their dog control responsibilities. It is intended that a registration fee graded in accordance with the size of the establishment will apply in order to finance the scheme.

In general, while there remains some opposition to the recommendations, there is general support for regulation in this area. It is a complex area with a very large and diverse number of interested parties and stakeholders. It is not considered practical to introduce interim arrangements for the regulation of puppy farms in advance of these new regulations and I understand that it is the Minister's intention to finalise matters in the coming weeks. The regulations represent one aspect of reform in regard to dog control. Other issues raised in the course of discussions with interested parties will be examined with a view to introducing additional reforms in the future.