MP to call for stiffer sentences for animal cruelty offences

Jim Fitzpatrick, Labour MP for Poplar and Limehouse, will tomorrow raise the subject of animal rescue centres in a short debate in Westminster Hall (4pm - 4.30pm). 

A former Minister at Defra who has served on the EFRA Select Committee, his connection with animal welfare issues stretches back many years. His speech tomorrow will focus on two areas, firstly seeking an update on the government’s plans to introduce stiffer sentences for those convicted of animal cruelty offences. And secondly, on the calls by the senior animal welfare charities to introduce regulation on animal rescue/rehoming centres. 

A draft copy of his speech is below (under strict embargo - no approach).

Rosie Cooper, Labour MP for West Lancashire, is likely to make a short intervention. 

David Rutley, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, will respond on behalf of the government. 

Please let us know if you require coverage of the debate

Jim Fitzpatrick is expected to say: 

...I’d like to put on record, my thanks to the RSPCA, Dogs Trust and Battersea Dogs & Cats Home for their briefings and I’m pleased to see the Minister in his place.

This is a relatively simple issue. Animal cruelty is wrong. We recognise that in our laws. There are penalties for those who break those laws. There is an ongoing debate with Government about whether those laws need strengthening.

There seems to be a consensus:

Most of the animal welfare organisations have long campaigned for increased sentences for animal cruelty and are working to bring about change to legislation to increase the maximum sentence from six months to five years’ imprisonment. They see many animals who have been badly treated, abused or abandoned enter their centres every year, yet six months is the lowest custodial penalty in 100 jurisdictions, across four continents. We know animal cruelty offenders are five times more likely to have a violent crime record.

Battersea was pleased when the Government issued the draft animal welfare Bill in December 2018, they have long argued that several of the activities covered by the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (England) Regulations 2018 were in serious need of review. It refreshes the licensing regime in England for selling animals as pets, dog breeding, boarding kennels, boarding for cats, home boarding for dogs, day care for dogs (regulated for the first time, the hiring of horses and keeping animals for exhibition.

However, it does not address the regulation of rescue centres.

The RSPCA have issued a position statement on licensing animal rescue and rehoming centres.
They believe that the Government should introduce licensing of animal rescue and rehoming centres under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (England) Regulations 2018. They feel this would close a legal loophole that exists as well as drive up standards and allow for enforcement. Usefully there are standards already in existence that would assist with licensing so reducing the burden on local authorities. It is important to get the definition of an animal sanctuary, rescue or rehoming centre right, to ensure the correct establishments are captured by any new law. There is a workable definition already in existence.

The RSPCA believes that all rescue and rehoming centres as well as sanctuaries, should be licensed under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (England) Regulations 2018. They believe this for the following reasons:

Firstly, to close the loophole that exists within the third-party ban on sales and prevent third-party sellers from setting up as rescue centres. Secondly, to improve the welfare of animals kept in such establishments by creating a legislative structure that drives improvements in standards of keeping, and allows for enforcement of such standards, and thirdly, standards already exist that would assist licensing so reducing the burden on local authorities.

The RSPCA also believes there is a risk that third-party sellers could become ‘rescue centres’ to evade the ban on third-party sales, so it would welcome the licensing of rescue centres and sanctuaries. Indeed, some pet shops already have a charitable arm, such as Pets at Home’s ‘Support Adoption for Pets’ operation which sells rescued animals such as rabbits, that have been abandoned, to rescue organisations and/or given back to Pets at Home.

The point RSPCA stress is that if a charity’s aims are generic, and those aims are – on the face – of it being followed, the Charity Commission could be limited in the actions it could take even if the organisation is a front, set up to avoid the third-party ban. Licensing rescue centres, they argue, would close this loophole.

Specialist knowledge is required to operate an animal sanctuary or rescue or rehoming centre, both in terms of management and administrative skills as well as expertise in caring for animals. All sanctuaries should be required to obtain a licence to carry on these activities. The RSPCA do not believe there should be a size or animal number threshold, below which any establishment should be excluded from licensing. The RSPCA undertakes around 85% of the enforcement action deriving from the Animal Welfare Act 2006. In the past eight years the RSPCA has investigated some eleven individuals and obtained 80 convictions against five persons.

As well as standards coming into force as part of the 2018 Regulations, the Association of Dogs and Cats Homes (ADCH) has standards which could provide a good basis for licensing of rescue and rehoming centres as well as aiding the ability of local authorities to enforce any licensing regime. ADCH has 132 members in eight different countries. The majority, over 80, are located in England. ADCH, which is 33 years old, has had enforceable standards since 2015 which are self and externally audited. These standards cover management, governance of the centre as well as the health and welfare of the cats and dogs in, and transported to, the centre. One possibility could be for ADCH members applying and being audited against the ADCH standards to be defined as low risk in a licensing regime.

The RSPCA understands that there are discussions in Scotland and Wales about improving the standards in sanctuaries and rescue and rehoming centres including in Scotland introducing a licensing system. A definition for such places, called “animal welfare establishments” has been proposed in Wales, for the Government to consider based on previous discussion with Defra.

The Dogs Trust has also weighed in. They say:

Currently there is no legislation in place, so anyone can set themselves up as a rehoming organisation or sanctuary. Furthermore, there is little to proactively safeguard the animals involved, as Local Authorities are not required to, and so do not inspect these premises. And that, poor welfare can have a knock-on effect when an animal is rehomed.

They are calling on the Government to address the lack of regulation of the rehoming sector, as a means of protecting our nation’s animals as well as a way of creating transparency in the industry and want to see the Government regulate all rehoming organisations and animal sanctuaries through a system of registration and licensing. Dogs Trust also recommend the Government develops an independent centrally accessible team of appropriately trained inspectors which can be utilised by all local authorities to carry out inspection of animal establishments, not only rehoming and sanctuaries but those involved in other activities such as boarding, breeding and selling.

The Association of Dog and Cat Homes (ADCH) was set up in 1985 to bring together likeminded organisations dedicated to dog and cat rescue. The Association acts as a platform for identifying and disseminating information on best practice and for raising the standards of animal welfare.

In 2014 ADCH launched a code of practice that sets out the standards of animal care that the Association believes represents the best practice for the sector. However, membership of ADCH is voluntary and as a result not all rehoming organisations and animal sanctuaries are required to adhere to the code of practice unless they choose to become a member and meet these requirements. Whilst self-regulation is an important step in the right direction, regulation is now required to ensure all establishments are meeting suitable levels of animal welfare, as opposed to just those who want to.

A related example is the Pet Advertising Advisory Group (PAAG). Chaired by Dogs Trust, PAAG also operates a system of self-regulation, for online adverts offering pets for sale. Due to its voluntary nature PAAG has reached a plateau in terms of the progress it can achieve, due to some websites being unwilling to engage and apply the group’s minimum standards for online adverts. With no obligation placed on those that do not want to engage to improve, self-regulation will always be limited to those that want to do more to protect animal welfare.

In late 2017 the Scottish Government held a consultation on introducing a registration and licensing system of animal sanctuaries and rehoming activities in Scotland. This was following the discovery of bad practice at Ayrshire Ark and a subsequent campaign ‘Sort Our Shelters’ by the Scottish Sun newspaper. The summary of responses has been published by the Scottish Government, who are now drafting regulations.

The RSPCA has recently conducted multiple operations, at which Dogs Trust has been providing support to ensure there is sufficient capacity to house all seized animals. One recent concluded case of bad practice was Crunchy’s Animal Rescue Centre in Oxfordshire. In 2013 six members of staff were convicted of nearly 100 counts of animal cruelty.

Although the Regulations will not cover rescue centres, the Government has committed to banning third-party sales of puppies and kittens under six months of age, with an exemption for rescue centres. It is essential that regulation of rescues be delivered hand in hand with the ban on third-party sales to prevent damaging unintended consequences such as preventing rescues from rehoming puppies and kittens legally, or third party dealers passing themselves off as rescues to circumvent the ban.

It is a welcome development that Government is minded to make this change. Currently, any person, organisation or animal welfare establishment who receives vulnerable animals on a regular basis, with a view to either rehoming, rehabilitating or providing long-term care, can do so without licensing or regulation across the UK. The only organisation that provides mentorship to these smaller rescues and is actively working to raise standards is the Association of Dogs & Cats Home (ADCH) run by Battersea which I’ve already mentioned.

Another example of worst practice was highlighted at Capricorn Animal Rescue Centre in Mold, North Wales. The Charity Commission had been investigating governance issues but following a request for support, the RSPCA Cymru had to step in. Capricorn has been subject to protests and petitions over the past couple of years by former volunteers concerned about its animal welfare standards.

In conclusion, the most senior animal welfare charities are very concerned about the vacuum in this area of animal protection.

The Government has made reassuring noises on this. Its consultation has indicated it is minded to legislate to provide stiffer sentences and look at the absence of regulation.

Scotland and Wales are moving on this also. I’d be grateful if the Minister could reassure us about what action he plans and the timeframe within which it is expected.