Debate contribution: Aversive Training Tools for Domestic Animals

Debate contribution by Mr Gareth Wilson on 5 October 2026.

MLA: Mr Gareth Wilson
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 5774096

Text

I speak as someone who also enjoys all the benefits of pet ownership, having had two German shepherds over the years. I am now firmly under the control of our cat, Casper, who enjoys an extravagant lifestyle at our expense, but I would not be without him. As someone who cares deeply about animal welfare, I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. I believe that ensuring that animals are treated with care, dignity and compassion commands broad support across the Assembly and throughout society. A growing body of evidence from animal welfare organisations, veterinary professionals and training experts highlights the negative impact that aversive training methods can have on domestic animals. Tools that rely on pain, fear or discomfort to suppress unwanted behaviour can cause physical and psychological distress. Rather than teaching an animal how to behave properly, they often create anxiety and confusion, and they can contribute to long-term behavioural issues. By contrast, reward-based training methods are increasingly recognised as the most effective and humane approach. Those methods encourage positive behaviour through reinforcement while building trust and strengthening the relationship between animals and their owners, as my colleague Tom has eloquently described. It is important to recognise that the continued availability of those devices may lead some owners to believe that they are acceptable or harmless training aids, when evidence increasingly suggests otherwise. That is why the issue deserves serious consideration. Other parts of the UK have already taken steps in that direction. Wales has prohibited the use of electric shock collars, and Scotland has moved towards tighter restrictions through official guidance and ongoing consideration of further measures. Therefore, it is right that Northern Ireland examines how best to strengthen protections for domestic animals and ensures that our legislation keeps pace with developments elsewhere. The DUP has consistently supported measures that improve animal welfare. We welcome the work undertaken by the Department in examining reforms in that area, including consideration of aversive training devices. However, it is equally important that any legislation introduced is carefully drafted and properly scrutinised. Animal welfare legislation must be both robust and workable in practice. We must guard against unintended consequences and ensure that any new restrictions do not inadvertently impede legitimate and necessary activities. In particular, there must be appropriate exemptions for situations where the safety of an animal, a handler or the wider public is at risk. Veterinarians, dog wardens, animal rescuers and others operating in emergency circumstances may require additional access to certain tools for safe handling purposes. Therefore, any future legislative framework must recognise those realities. For that reason, I have concerns about the amendment. The motion rightly acknowledges that exceptional circumstances may exist where "appropriate exemptions" are necessary. It is important that, as legislation is developed, such practical considerations are not overlooked in pursuit of a well-intended objective.
Finally, any change in the law must be supported by effective enforcement arrangements. There is little benefit in creating legislative provisions that cannot be properly implemented. That is why cooperation between the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs and the Department of Justice, alongside adequate resourcing, will be essential if the proposals are to achieve their intended purpose. If legislation is developed appropriately, with the necessary safeguards and practical exemptions, it can send a clear message that fear-based and cruel training methods have no place in modern animal care, while ensuring that public safety and animal welfare remain fully protected. I am therefore pleased to support the principles of the motion.

583 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.

Challenge this classification