Debate contribution: Aversive Training Tools for Domestic Animals

Debate contribution by Ms Diana Armstrong on 5 October 2026.

MLA: Ms Diana Armstrong
Party at the time: Ulster 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 5774758

Text

I thank the Member for her intervention. I think the topic has been well rehearsed, and my colleague has clearly explained the issue. Shock collars, prong collars, choke chains and other aversive devices rely on an animal avoiding an unpleasant consequence. We should move away from training methods that are based on fear and discomfort and, as other Members have said, towards humane reward-based approaches. That view is supported by leading animal welfare organisations, including the Dogs Trust, the USPCA and Cats Protection, which have all highlighted the benefits of positive training methods and the need to reduce reliance on devices that cause unnecessary suffering. There has been discussion today about where the line should be drawn, and that is a legitimate debate. Members' contributions to the debate covered that issue further. The purpose of the motion is not to make life more difficult for responsible pet owners, nor is it to prevent professionals from taking the necessary action when an animal presents an immediate danger to itself or others. That is precisely why the motion recognises that appropriate exemptions may be necessary for veterinarians, animal rescuers or dog wardens when particular equipment is genuinely required for safe handling or an emergency. In an ideal world, we would not want anybody to use aversive tools and for all such tools to be banned. We do not want any domestic animal to have those tools used on them as a way of controlling them by inflicting pain and suffering. However, in some genuine emergencies, professionals should have the right to use an aversive tool to control environments, such as in rescue situations, where a dog warden or rescuer may need to use a slip lead to control a highly aggressive dog when it is not possible to clip on a harness or a collar. Therefore, appropriate exemptions for some of the tools, such as slip leads, are necessary, but we do not want anyone using those tools unless it is an emergency and they are a professional. We should not allow legitimate concerns about exceptional circumstances to prevent us from dealing with the routine use of devices that can cause unnecessary suffering. I turn to Members' contributions. The proposer of the amendment, Mr Blair, spoke about the dedication of animal welfare organisations and the Minister's work to ensure that animal welfare remains high on the agenda through the animal welfare pathway. He was pleased that the motion’s proposal is included in the pathway. Horrifyingly, he spoke of shock collars delivering shocks of up to 60,000 volts for as long as 11 seconds at a time. Áine Murphy spoke against aversive tools, saying that banning them is a principle should unite us all in the Chamber. She focused on the role of councils in implementing dog welfare legislation and said that more education was needed for councils, as well as more resources. Michelle McIlveen said that we are a nation of animal lovers, and, while there is no specific prohibition of those devices in Northern Ireland, the evidence does not show that e-collars are a more effective means of training. In fact, they can make an animal more tense. The DUP supports the prohibition of aversive devices, and the legislation needs to be carefully drafted with exemptions where handlers need safe handling conditions. Daniel McCrossan told us that his lovely dogs, Rosie and Hudson, brought joy to his life. He said that we have a duty to treat animals with kindness and respect, with no place for training methods that rely on fear and pain. Tom Buchanan said that a dog is a man's best friend, demonstrates loyalty and is part of the family, and that aversive tools are nothing short of barbaric. Gareth Wilson stated that our legislation must keep pace with that in other jurisdictions, but it must be workable and guard against unintended consequences. I missed the end of Andrew McMurray's speech, but he acknowledged that we should be at the forefront of this. I welcome those comments. The UUP welcomes the fact that the Minister and his Department have already examined this issue through the recent animal welfare consultation, which has now closed. I hope that the Minister will carefully consider the responses received, but the consultation cannot be the end point. At some point the consultation must lead to action, and that is what the motion seeks. Northern Ireland should have a modern animal welfare framework that reflects our understanding of animal behaviour and responsible training. Any prohibition must be practical, enforceable and clearly understood by owners, trainers, retailers and enforcement agencies. If new offences are introduced, appropriate penalties and adequate enforcement resources will be required, which will necessitate cooperation from DAERA and the Department of Justice. Alongside legislation, there must be education. Most pet owners care deeply about their animals and want to do the right thing, so we should ensure that they have access to reliable advice and humane, evidence-based training methods and support when behavioural problems arise. Animals cannot tell us when a training method has frightened them or caused them pain. They depend entirely on us to set the standards to which they are treated. Today, we have an opportunity to say clearly that unnecessary pain and fear have no place in the training of domestic animals. We have an opportunity to promote humane alternatives, strengthen animal welfare protections and turn those principles into meaningful action. Therefore, I hope that Members across the House will support the motion. The UUP will not support the amendment, and I urge the Minister to introduce the necessary legislation —.
Yes, certainly.
I thank the Minister for providing that context. In closing, I urge him, following the examination of consultation responses, to introduce the necessary legislation in this Assembly mandate, if possible, or, if not, the next mandate.

971 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