|
Government
must now reflect
on consultation responses says CDB
PUBLIC CONSULTATION on a future Animal Welfare Bill may have
closed, but has the Government’s mind closed as well?
A statement issued by DEFRA suggests that animal welfare Minister
Elliot Morley MP has already settled his views on tail docking
even though the ink is not yet dry on the hundreds of responses
sent to his Department before the April 30 deadline, says the
Council of Docked Breeds. It has urged the Government to reflect
long and hard on all the issues raised by the public and by
interested parties before deciding policy.
“It is an open secret that of more than 1,600 letters received
by DEFRA from members of the public, the overwhelming majority
came from dog breeders and owners concerned about a possible
ban on tail docking. Yet on the very day that consultation closed,
Mr Morley clearly indicated that he is opposed to docking for
reasons of hygiene or to maintain breed standards. His description
of it as a ‘mutilation’ was gratuitously emotive,”
said CDB Secretary Ginette Elliott.
“Would it not be more pertinent for him to read and reflect
on some of the letters first, before rushing into hasty judgements?”
“Of course we welcome the acknowledgement, implied in what
Mr Morley does not say, that docking is acceptable in some instances
such as in the case of sporting dogs. But if there is no welfare
issue here, then what makes the docking of non-sporting dogs
such a problem?
The question of docking should be left for breeders to decide
in consultation with their veterinary advisers,” said Ginette
Elliott.
Dismay
The
CDB also expressed dismay that the Government is again considering
UK accession to the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection
of Pet Animals, which will affect more than 100 dog breeds.
“The Convention was one of four matters which was expressly
excluded from the Animal Welfare consultation. If Ministers
were minded to consider signing up to this well-meaning but
woolly piece of European legislation, would it not have been
reasonable to invite comment on it at the same time as other
welfare issue?” asked Ginette Elliott.
“It seems likely that some of those 1,600 letter writers
might have wished to have given DEFRA the benefit of their
advice on the European Convention. Perhaps Ministers knew
that the advice they would have received would not have been
to their liking.”
|
