Chris Andrews (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State for coming to the House to discuss the matter of XL bullies.

Despite recent changes, XL bully legislation continues to fall short in several key areas, particularly in fairness, due process and clarity. The introduction of a review process for private owners of dogs to seek a certificate of exemption is welcome and important, but the legislation still lacks several important amendments causing concern for rescue organisations, dog owners and advocates. Currently, a private owner of an XL bully can appeal for an exemption, if necessary. That is welcome. The difficulty is that the same does not apply to rescue organisations and pounds and if it does not, many dogs will be killed. The language in the legislation and regulations is vague. There is currently no legal provision that allows dogs held in rescue centres or local authority pounds to receive an interim certificate of exemption. This omission creates an inconsistency whereby dogs cannot be re-homed without a permanent certificate of exemption, but a permanent certificate of exemption can only be applied for after a dog is placed in a home. Therefore, those dogs are left in limbo, unable to move to homes where they would legally be allowed to receive the exemption. There should be a temporary or interim certificate process for rescues and pounds to facilitate lawful re-homing and prevent the unnecessary killing of dogs, which, if they were reviewed, would be spared.

There is also a clear inconsistency in breed identification. There is no published training standard or certification process for vets to ensure accurate and consistent breed identification. This is a glaring issue, given the widespread misclassification of XL bully dogs. Dog wardens have been arbitrarily misidentifying XL bully dogs. At the very least, a mandatory, uniform training with a written examination is needed for all dog wardens. The absence of such training will continue to lead to misclassification, the suffering of dogs and an unnecessary waste of taxpayers' money. As recently as this week, a presa canario was euthanised as an XL bully in a Limerick pound. Such mistakes will be made because of the lack of clarity. The confirmation standards used to define XL bully-type remain vague, unamended and open to interpretation. How it is decided that a dog is an XL bully is vague and unclear. There is still no maximum height despite height being a critical trait in breed classification. The continued use of the term "type" fosters subjectivity and inconsistency, enabling the misclassification of dogs that do not possess core XL bully characteristics. This vagueness perpetuates the risk of over-reach, penalising responsible owners and wrongly targeting dogs which are not XL bullies. It throws the net so wide that it covers all bully breeds and that is a dangerous precedent to set.

The lack of legal protection for dogs in rescue centres and dog pounds has contributed to high stress, burnout and morale injury among staff and volunteers. The psychological trauma caused by these preventable outcomes is immediate and long-lasting, not to mention the cruel and unnecessary suffering inflicted on the dogs themselves. Until these issues are resolved, the legislation will continue to result in unnecessary animal deaths, undermine public confidence and cause serious distress to those working to protect these animals. The Government must urgently consider these issues and commit to meaningful revisions of the regulations.

Furthermore, I understand ongoing legislative work is being done in this area. It is important that the issues affecting XL bullies are not ignored and that the relevant advocacy and rescue groups are included in the consultation process.

Neale Richmond (Dublin Rathdown, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Senator Andrews for raising this matter. I ask him to bear with me. I have a slightly lengthy answer which I will deliver on behalf of the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Heydon, who has asked me to take this Commencement matter.

The Control of Dogs (XL Bully) Regulations 2024, SI 491 of 2024, that banned XL bully dogs came into force in two stages beginning on 1 October 2024, with a full ownership ban coming into force on 1 February 2025. The ban was brought in by the then Minister for Rural and Community Development, who was responsible for dog control at that time. The XL bully-type dog is a variant of the wider American bully breed. It is typically larger in height and body shape and more muscular than other American bully-type breeds such as the micro, pocket, standard and classic breeds. It is acknowledged that XL bully is not a recognised breed and that XL bullies are a cross of restricted breeds.Therefore, it was unanimously decided by the implementation team that was established to develop the regulations that the term used with regard to describing the dogs should be XL bully-type. The only legally recognised method of identification of a dog as an XL bully-type in Ireland is by use of the physical conformation standard contained in the regulations.

The ban was brought in over two stages to give XL bully-type dog owners who wished to keep their XL bully-type dog the time to obtain a certificate of exemption. There was a four-month period between 1 October 2024 and before 1 February 2025 where owners were able to apply for a certificate of exemption. Charitable organisations were also able to apply for certificate of exemptions for XL bully-type dogs in their care during this period if they wished. As part of the regulations, any registered charitable organisation that had an XL bully-type dog in its care before 1 October 2024 had until before 1 February 2025 to rehome the dog to a new owner.

Since 1 February 2025, if an owner is found to have an XL bully type-dog in his or her possession, as determined by the dog warden in accordance with the XL bully-type dog physical conformation standard, without a certificate of exemption or proof of application for a certificate of exemption, the dog warden may seize the dog and have the dog euthanised in a humane manner. In addition, such owners may be charged with an offence under the Control of Dogs Act 1986.

A small number of animal welfare organisations sought a judicial review of the regulations. As part of this process, the organisations concerned had sought an injunction to extend the 1 February deadline for rehoming XL bully-type dogs in their care until the judicial review process was completed. This injunction was denied by the High Court. Therefore, it remains illegal for these organisations to rehome an XL bully-type dog after 1 February. As outlined in the regulation, the only dogs that were permitted to be rehomed up to 1 February were those that were in the care of the relevant bodies before 1 October 2024. It is illegal for any person or organisation to rehome an XL bully-type dog after 1 February of this year. I am informed that the case has been settled and the matter is due for mention in the High Court on 15 July.

An amendment to the initial XL bully regulations came into force on 9 June 2025. The amended regulations define a review process in circumstances where a dog owner may disagree with the determination of a dog warden that a dog not in possession of a certificate of exemption meets the physical conformation standard. If, following review, a dog is determined to be an XL bully-type dog, the review process allows for the relevant owner, including a charitable organisation, to obtain a certificate of exemption which will allow them to keep the dog until the end of its natural life, provided that the dog was born before 10 December 2024. If a person or organisation does not wish to keep an XL bully-type dog, they can surrender the dog to their local authority dog warden service where the dog will be euthanised in a humane manner.

The dog control stakeholder group, established in 2024 by the Minister for Rural and Community Development and the Gaeltacht, has been tasked with considering the policy and legislative matters with regard to the control of dogs. The stakeholder group meets regularly, and the work of the group is wide-ranging and complex in nature. The group's remit includes considering the need for legislative change. This requires in-depth analysis and consultation to ensure amendments are robust, fit for purpose, implementable and deliver the best outcomes for communities and for dogs themselves. This work will take some time. However, the Minister, Deputy Heydon, has no objection in principle to any measure that may improve the overall regulation of the dog breeding sector and support public safety and the welfare of dogs, and he is more than happy to engage with the Senator directly to achieve that.

Chris Andrews (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not believe for a second that dog bans work for a variety of reasons. I do not have the time to go into it now. The key point is that the appeal process afforded to private dog owners should be afforded to rescues and pounds. However, because of the vague language in the legislation proposed, such as the use of the word "type", it encompasses all bully breeds and that is going to have a really negative impact because many of the dog wardens do not have the training that is required to identify a dog. They have not had the training in the past and there are no plans to have dog wardens trained in the future for identifying dogs. That language then leaves it open to interpretation. I honestly feel that the Minister is on the right track but we need to refine the language to ensure that dogs in pounds and rescues also have the ability to get an exemption.

Neale Richmond (Dublin Rathdown, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will make three points in very brief reply to the Senator. First, with regard to the use of the word "type" and how it came to be and the need to separate, there is an XL breed but then, within the breed, there are types of dogs. That is the differentiation that was sought because there is a very specific thing at play here. In terms of the training in respect of identification and those processes, I fully take the Senator's points on board, but I have been reassured that those processes are in place as best as is possible.

It does come to the issue with regard to the ideological and ethical issue of whether one believe bans work or not. The Government has made a decision to ban this type of breed of dog for very particular high-profile reasons, and we are not alone in doing that. At some stage in politics, we all have to live with agreeing to disagree. However, improvements can always be made to legislation and that requires the full engagement of all aspects of the House. I am sure the Minister, Deputy Heydon, will be more than happy to go along that path with the Senator as quickly as possible.

Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Sin deireadh an chláir. The House stands suspended until 10.30 a.m.