Debate contribution: Hunting with Dogs Bill: Second Stage

Debate contribution by Ms Kate Nicholl on 26 May 2026.

MLA: Ms Kate Nicholl
Party at the time: Alliance Party
Date: 26 May 2026
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Private Members' Business
Heading: Hunting with Dogs Bill: Second Stage
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 5583100

Text

I will start by congratulating my colleague John Blair. I am really proud of him. He has been working on the Bill for so long and is so passionate about the issue. My son was with me when I was coming into Stormont this morning, and I pointed at John and said, "There's John. He has a really big day today". I explained to my son what the Bill is about, and he asked, "Why would anyone want to do that?". He was thrilled to have a chat with John about why the Bill is so important. John therefore deserves recognition for his tenacity and determination in developing the legislation. The Bill is really important. I am conscious that I am a South Belfast MLA, but I grew up in rural Zimbabwe, where hunting is very normal. I am therefore passionate about the issue. Hunting with dogs is cruel and unnecessary and is incompatible with a modern society. It has been proven that foxes, deer and hares are physiologically and psychologically damaged when chased by a hunt, regardless of whether it results in death. One of my constituents who is watching the debate emailed me to say that they are really frustrated by the argument that hunting with dogs is no worse than what happens in nature. They made the clear point that that statement does not justify human-inflicted suffering. Of course what happens in nature is cruel, but why do we add to that cruelty?
I do not agree with that. I have heard your points, and of course there is suffering in nature. What happens in nature is often horrific for us to witness, but the Bill is about humans instigating that suffering. For me, the Bill is fundamentally about addressing animal cruelty, and, to be honest, when we get into a tangled conversation about it, I feel that such arguments are a means of defence because it is inconvenient to say otherwise. We are justifying the deliberate killing of animals for pleasure and sport. I find that very hard to get my head around. This is about the sort of society in which we want to live, and so many of my constituents are so passionate about the issue. We have received so many emails in the past number of weeks from people who are genuinely very distressed by it. The Bill desires to prohibit the hunting of wild animals with dogs, trail hunting and terrier work in Northern Ireland. I credit my colleague John for explaining ad nauseam that the Bill is not about banning hunting with a gun. Rather, it is about banning trying to kill wild animals with a dog. The Bill will not prevent animal cruelty in Northern Ireland, as there will always be elements of that, but it will play its part in preventing that type of cruelty. It is also about the disturbance of protected habitats, the disruption of ecosystems and disease concerns. My colleague David Honeyford regularly talks about the impact of disease on farms. Hunting is a source of entertainment and, as outlined by the British Pest Control Association, is not a legitimate form of pest control.
The Bill is informed by the Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Act 2023 and slots into an existing regulatory framework for protecting wildlife, as set out in the Wildlife (Northern Ireland) Order 1985. The important point to focus on in the debate is that the Bill is not about criminalising ordinary dog walking, or any ordinary or legal countryside activities. A dog chasing an animal does not constitute an offence, and the Bill will not treat it as such. It focuses on the deliberate hunting behaviour by the owner or participant. It does not affect shooting, angling or drag hunting but merely intends to close loopholes and provide a stronger framework for enforcement while preventing animal cruelty, preserving biodiversity and protecting landowners' families, crops and livestock. My final point is that public opinion is clear. Over 72% of those who said that they lived in Northern Ireland agreed with the proposal and said that all hunting, including searching, coursing, capturing or killing wild animals with dogs, should be banned in Northern Ireland. A staggering 80·45% said that ending the hunting of wild animals with dogs was important to them, and 70·35% said that they fully supported the intentions of the Bill. Those results show the strength of feeling on the matter. I believe that it is morally wrong to kill for pleasure. I do not think that tradition is an excuse for cruelty. I agree with what John said: we are a nation of animal lovers. That is why I am proud to support the Bill, and I urge everyone to consider the importance of animal welfare and the public support for the legislation and to support the Second Stage of the Bill.

810 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