No, I will not.
We understand that ACPO is looking to form a police-wide group because it believes that the infrastructure is in place for the police service and local authorities to join up more. That is what hon. Members have asked for. We want that approach to develop, so we are looking forward to ACPO forming that group to assist us in that. The police would be the first to admit that enforcement of legislation could be improved, and I very much welcome the formation of that group. We could be motivated to rush to legislate, but we need that group to be formed. We need to give it time to consider the question of uniformity of enforcement across the piece.
Examples have been given of where things are working well. The hon. Member for Hammersmith and Fulham (Mr. Hands) said that there was a problem, but that the powers are now being used and things are better. My hon. Friend the Member for Battersea (Martin Linton) said the same thing. I was very concerned about the cases in the constituency of the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Martin Horwood), and I shall look into them. Everyone agrees that enforcement is patchy, but before we rush to legislate, let us ensure that the rules on the statute book are clear and that the enforcing authorities have the means to put them to the test properly.
Many hon. Members made some important points; as I said, I congratulate the hon. Member for Romford. My hon. Friend the Member for Brigg and Goole (Mr. Cawsey) talked about options available in the courts; they have a range of different measures available to them. For example, the Dogs Act 1871 allows a court to impose any order it thinks fit, and I can bring other orders to his attention. My hon. Friend the Member for Battersea campaigned on the issue in his constituency, and he raised the issue of microchips. We think that enforcement of such a policy would be problematic, but we want to improve the situation.
The hon. Member for Southend, West (Mr. Amess) talked about his lazy dog, and I will tell him about the land-girls. He also received a Rottweiler intervention from the hon. Member for Christchurch (Mr. Chope). Both of them were around when the previous dangerous dogs legislation was introduced. The hon. Member for Hammersmith and Fulham gave some good examples of where his council is working well.
We are grateful for the contributions of hon. Members. We take the matter very seriously. When we had that horrific case last January—
It being one and a half hours after the commencement of the proceedings, the motion lapsed, without Question put, pursuant to the Temporary Standing Order (Topical debates).
Dangerous Dogs
Proceeding contribution from
Jonathan Shaw
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 12 June 2008.
It occurred during Topical debate on Dangerous Dogs.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
477 c517-8 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:16:55 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481373
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481373
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481373