Debate contribution: Aversive Training Tools for Domestic Animals
Debate contribution by Miss Michelle McIlveen on .
- MLA
- Miss Michelle McIlveen
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 5 October 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Aversive Training Tools for Domestic Animals
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5774068
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I support the motion. How we train an animal is not simply a matter of personal preference; it is a matter of animal welfare. We are a nation of animal lovers. Across Northern Ireland, hundreds of thousands of people share their homes with dogs and cats. Those animals depend very much on us for their care, and they have no say in how they are trained. As has been said, the principle behind the motion is very simple. If we can train animals effectively without causing pain or fear, why would we choose methods that do? That principle is already acknowledged in DAERA's code of practice for the welfare of dogs. It recommends "positive reward-based training" and advises against methods that can cause pain or fear, including electric shock collars. However, as has been said, we have no specific prohibition on those devices. An e-collar can be used unless its use amounts to unnecessary suffering. The emphasis, therefore, is on proving harm after it has happened. However, where the evidence shows that a particular method carries unnecessary welfare risks, we should prevent that harm in the first place. Looking specifically at electronic collars, the evidence does not show a clear benefit that outweighs the welfare concerns. In a controlled study of dogs with recall problems, there was no consistent evidence that e-collar training was more effective. Yet, dogs trained with electronic stimulation spent more time tense and interacted less with their surroundings. The Scottish and Welsh Governments' positions have been mentioned, but I will look at those in more detail. The Welsh Government held an independent review and reached a similar conclusion. They found that the welfare costs of electronic collars were likely to outweigh their benefits, pointing to the potential to cause pain, the availability of effective alternatives and the risk of misuse or abuse. As a result, by following an evidence-based approach, Wales retained its prohibition on attaching electronic shock collars to dogs and cats.
The Scottish Government's guidance says that effective dog training is reward-based, warning that aversive methods can cause "unacceptable pain, suffering and distress". Recently, the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission concluded:
"Reward-based training methods are effective and are associated with limited or no welfare risks",
while aversive devices:
"have the potential to cause harm".
Aversive methods can stop a behaviour without addressing why it is happening. If fear, anxiety or frustration is behind a problem, making a dog frightened of the consequences may mask the symptom rather than address the underlying issue. Scottish guidance warns that aversive techniques can worsen behavioural problems or contribute to aggressive responses. Reward-based training teaches the animal what we want it to do and gives it a reason to repeat that behaviour. The British Small Animal Veterinary Association also recommends reward-based training, recognising that it builds confidence and trust and avoids the stresses that are associated with aversive methods. Of course, not every dog is easy to train. Consider a rescue dog with a history of fear or neglect or a dog with serious recall or behavioural problems. Those animals may need specialist intervention, consistency and, in some cases, veterinary or behavioural assessment, not someone reaching first for a device that is designed to cause pain or fear. Of course, there are wider consequences, too. The Dogs Trust's Generation Pup research found that aversive training methods were associated with higher incidences of owners reporting problematic behaviour when dogs were a year old. It is welcome that DAERA has formally consulted on banning specific aversive training devices, including electric shock collars, prong collars and choke chains. That consultation closed on 30 June. The Minister has indicated that he will consider the next steps once that has been reviewed. However, we need to be clear about what those next steps should be. We absolutely should legislate as soon as possible. We should prohibit the use and possession of specific aversive training devices while also carefully drafting exemptions where veterinary professionals and rescue organisations genuinely need particular equipment for safe handling or in an emergency. Mr Blair talked about his amendment. It is worrying that the amendment removes all mention of that or any consideration of whether those tools would be justified in exceptional circumstances. That warrants further discussion. Appropriately —
Of course.
I will come to a close.
I will close at that point, thank you.
I lost my run.
728 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Awaiting analysis
This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.