Debate contribution: Review of Local Councils’ Animal Welfare Policies

Debate contribution by Mr Andrew Muir on 6 May 2025.

MLA

Mr Andrew Muir

Party at the time

Alliance Party

Date

6 May 2025

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Review of Local Councils’ Animal Welfare Policies

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4929835

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you very much, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. At the outset, I want to put on record that I am fully supportive of any actions that we can take to advance the welfare of animals. Indeed, when I took up the post, I made it clear from day 1 that animal welfare was one of my priorities. I was therefore pleased that one of my first engagements as Minister was a visit to the rescue and rehoming centre run by the USPCA in Newry. I agree with the sentiment outlined at the start of the motion. I passionately believe that all dogs in Northern Ireland should be subject to the highest standards of welfare, and I have no hesitation in commending the work of all the organisations involved in rescuing, rehoming and rehabilitating dogs so that they can find new, trusting and forever homes. I am continually impressed by the fantastic work undertaken by the sector, which is why I was delighted to meet, late last year, the Northern Ireland Companion Animal Welfare Group (NICAWG) and seek its views on my forthcoming animal welfare pathway. It is crucial that the sector and government work together to advance the changes necessary to deliver the best animal welfare standards. I am pleased to learn that the Dogs Trust was recently appointed chair of the group, and I am looking forward to visiting its rehoming centre in Ballymena very soon. In addressing the motion, I feel that it would be beneficial for Members if I set out the responsibilities of my Department when it comes to dog control and animal welfare. My Department is responsible for enforcing all farmed animal welfare legislation and legislation relating to the transport and slaughter of animals. My Department is responsible for dog control and animal welfare policy and legislation. However, my Department is not responsible for the enforcement of legislation, and it is clearly and legally not the statutory agency. That power and responsibility lie fully with district councils. Therefore, it is not appropriate for my Department to direct councils on how to deploy dog wardens or animal welfare officers, nor does my Department instruct councils in how they discharge their legal duties to deal with stray dogs or investigate the abuse of companion animals. When the Dogs Order was passed in 1983, and then, when the Welfare of Animals Act made its way through the House in 2011, it was recognised that councils were best placed to deliver dog control and animal welfare enforcement services. That is because councils have the ability to understand local circumstances and to deliver services for citizens that are appropriate to their localities.

Yes, no problem.

What we are talking about is primary legislation, and, yes, of course you can amend primary legislation. With regard to the animal welfare pathway that we are outlining for the rest of the mandate, however, I lost two years of the mandate because one party downed tools and walked out because the going got tough. I am trying to catch up on that time, and I have to be clear about what I can achieve in the mandate. I would like to do lots more, including primary legislation, but I am not able to do that within the shortened mandate. We have outlined what we plan to do with the animal pathway, and I will talk a bit more about that. If these institutions stay up, there will be, obviously, an opportunity to introduce primary legislation on this issue in the next mandate. We can have a discussion on that, but we are focused on the actions that we can take now. I have real and serious concerns. I recognise the issues raised in the motion, but issues are regularly raised with me about breeding establishments and the third-party sale of puppies and kittens. That is where the concerns coming to me are, and that is what we are seeking to respond to. I want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the, often unheralded, work of council dog wardens and animal welfare officers. Neither has an easy task.

Dog wardens, for example, keep our streets, parks and livestock safe by dealing with out-of-control or stray dogs. Regrettably, dog wardens are at the forefront of dealing with a minority of irresponsible owners who do not care for their dogs or the lives of others and have no regard for the dog control laws.

When the Dogs Order was debated in Westminster in the early 1980s, there was a well-documented problem with stray dogs in Northern Ireland. Indeed, that is confirmed in an edition of 'Scene Around Six' from 11 March 1982 — a programme that some people may be aware of — that can be seen in BBC Archive footage. We do not have similar scenes today because of the effectiveness of councils' dog warden services. How our councils have evolved their service delivery to reflect the changing times is notable. When a stray dog is collected by the dog warden, euthanasia is not the immediate response. Councils and their dog wardens have worked tirelessly to build contacts with communities, and, crucially, with rescue and rehoming centres. Indeed, each council has strong relationships with rescue and rehoming centres. In fact, some council pounds are operated by rescue organisations. Each of the 11 councils has advised my Department that the preferred course of action is to find a new home for unclaimed stray dogs. In the 2023-24 reporting period, the 11 councils impounded almost 3,000 stray dogs. Of those dogs, 40% were returned to the owner or reclaimed; 43% were passed to animal shelters; 13% were rehomed directly, sold or moved on by the council pounds; and only 4% were, sadly, euthanised. It is regrettable that any dog has to be euthanised, but councils have informed my Department that there are some situations in which that is, sadly, the only course of action. Councils say that they will only euthanise a dog when it is clear that the dog cannot be rehomed because it has an illness or injuries from which it is not likely to recover, is aggressive or has been involved in attacks. The bottom line is that the power to put a stray dog down after five days is a discretionary one that each council uses sparingly. I disagree with the motion, which suggests that the best course of action is for me, as Minister, to intervene and remove the decision-making powers from councils. Each council has the scope to shape and deploy an enforcement strategy that meets local needs, and that is only right. I am concerned that the thrust of the motion would see me take that ability away from democratically elected councils — on which nearly every party in the Chamber has representatives — and have central government impose a one-size-fits-all policy. I disagree with that. Crucially, officials from my Department have not been advised by council officers that any immediate reform of the legislation is needed to deal with stray dogs. If Members have concerns about service delivery or performance by their local councils, I urge them to elevate them through the appropriate channels, including via the relevant councils and councillors. My Department supports councils by meeting regularly with council officers to provide guidance and share understanding of how dog control and animal welfare legislation should operate. Furthermore, there are regular meetings with council representatives on the Northern Ireland Dog Advisory Group. My officials have liaised extensively with the group on dog control and ownership matters, and I have previously attended dog warden conferences. My Department also hosts regular multi-agency meetings with the councils and the police to share experiences and coordinate responses where necessary. Our councils remain an integral part of the Paws for Thought group, which continues to work collaboratively to disrupt the trafficking of low-welfare pups to Great Britain. I hope that we can deepen that cooperation through my desire to launch a campaign to promote responsible dog ownership. The Dogs Trust is absolutely correct to call for animal welfare establishments to be inspected and licensed. I am pleased to say that I have talked about that requirement with representatives from the Dogs Trust, and, as highlighted, with the Northern Ireland Companion Animal Welfare Group late last year. That is why a key component of my animal welfare pathway, which will be launched very soon, will involve bringing legislation to the House to mandate the inspection and licensing of rescue and rehoming organisations. The legislation has the potential to raise standards across the sector and any proposals will be subject to public consultation in due course. At this stage, I am not minded to require dog pounds to be licensed. Based on the information provided by councils, dog pounds in Northern Ireland fall into three categories: those that are operated by councils; those that are operated on behalf of councils by rehoming-type organisations; and those that are operated on behalf of councils by commercial boarding kennels. The Dogs Order states that, when a council chooses to use a commercial boarding kennel as a pound, the boarding kennel must have a valid licence to act as a boarding kennel. The licence is provided by my Department and is conferred on the business only after it successfully completes an inspection. If a council continues to use a rehoming centre, I anticipate that the forthcoming proposal under my animal welfare pathway will require the rehoming organisation to have a licence. Therefore, the only potential gap is pounds that are operated by councils themselves. Given that councils are statutorily responsible for the licensing and enforcement of companion animal welfare, they would, in essence, be marking their own homework. However, if we cannot trust the enforcer of animal welfare legislation, who can we trust? I welcome the passion of Members in seeking sensible solutions to advance animal welfare legislation here. Rescue and rehoming charities provide a fantastic service for Northern Ireland and support the endeavours of the council dog warden service. I want Northern Ireland to be a place where dogs are valued and cherished because of the companionship and love that they bring. However, the reality is that a very small minority think that they can discard their dog because looking after it has become an imposition or the breed is no longer in fashion. We need to engage with, educate and inform current and prospective dog owners so that they make the right choices — we should give them the information that they need. Where there are failures in ownership and breaches of the law, there should be enforcement and consequences. The law already provides for a range of offences, including failure to license and microchip a dog, right through to letting a dog stray and failing to be in control of a dog. In the past year, the 11 councils have issued nearly 24,000 warning letters; over 1,200 fixed penalty notices for failure to obtain a dog licence and over 500 fixed penalty notices for straying offences were issued; and a further 142 prosecutions were initiated. I strive for a society where we do not have to resort to enforcement and warning letters and where fixed penalties and prosecutions are rare. We have a challenge to rise to, namely for responsible dog ownership to be not just an aspiration but the norm. I say this to Members: if you want progress, get behind my vision and, collectively, we can deliver for the people of Northern Ireland who have an interest in the well-being of animals and the public.

1,931 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:27 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification