PROTECTION FROM DOGS (Hansard, 4 March 1969)

§ Mr. Peter Doig (Dundee, West)
I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to compel dog owners to display a warning notice on their outside gate; and for connected purposes. I seek, in my Bill, to achieve three things. First, that the warning be given on the outside gate, "Beware of the dog," or a similar notice. Secondly, that a letterbox should be provided on the outside gate by dog owners. Thirdly, to establish beyond all doubt the legal right of people to use an approved dog repellant in self-defence. Shortly after introducing a similar Bill some time ago I received a number of letters and I will quote from three of them. One person wrote: I am writing to express my support for your Bill. The attitude of the rest of the House of Commons was the usual one of merriment. I can only say that they were displaying an appalling ignorance of the real problem". Another wrote: As a postman, I feel that this dog menace is getting out of hand. The number of dog bites will not decrease until postmen are issued with a repellant. The third wrote: My sister has been savaged in the road by a couple of dogs"—[Laughter.] I do not understand why hon. Members find that amusing. The people who have written to me complaining of the merriment shown by the House will feel even more disturbed by the attitude of hon. Members now. If those who laugh at this sort of tragedy had to watch their relatives being savaged by dogs, they would take a different attitude.
I also received a letter or two against the Bill. I will quote from only one to show the type of person who is against a Measure of this sort. He wrote: I saw one postman terrifying three little corgis who were playfully snapping at his heels. One postman who kicks a dog makes it bad for all postmen who meet that dog. I have with me a newspaper cutting headed: Dog attacks the Queen's horse". It tells of how a dog attacked the Queen's horse while she was in Chile, Fortunately, … a burly policeman nearby gave it a heavy kick and the dog scampered into the crowd, whimpering in pain. 227 If that had not happened, the Queen might have been in serious trouble.
This problem can easily be solved because there is an effective dog repellant available. It has been developed by a firm in Georgia, America. Its trade name is "Halt" and I have sent details of the product to the Postmaster-General and the Home Secretary. The repellant was developed more than six years ago by two university lecturers and a veterinary surgeon. It does no permanent damage to dogs, but simply destroys their aggressive tendencies for about 15 minutes.
This repellant was tested by the United States Post Office in Miami, Baltimore, Los Angeles and Detroit. The results showed a reduction of 85 per cent. in the number of postmen bitten by dogs in each of those places—a remarkable achievement. Because of the successful results of these tests this repellant is now standard issue to all postmen who request it in the United States, Canada and Switzerland. It is also in use by nearly all the major public utility companies in America. After six years of use, it is said that no difficulties have arisen either with dog owners or the public generally.
Having written to the Postmaster-General on the subject, I received from his private secretary what I can only describe as a most unsatisfactory reply which appeared to minimise the problem. The letter said Although it is true that some countries, particularly those where there is more likely to be a problem with rabies, equip their postmen with chemical spray animal repellants, we have not adopted similar measures in this country for a variety of reasons. For example, we could encounter difficulties under the Protection of Animals Act, 1911 and the Firearms Act, 1937, and no doubt we would receive spirited opposition from the animal-loving public. It is not true that dog bites pose one of the most serious safety problems in the Post Office. There are over 2½ million dogs licensed in this country and about 20 million delivery points. From a total staff of 101,000 postmen, only about 300 a year suffer relatively severe dog bites". That minimised the problem, because if 300 postmen a year suffer relatively severe dog bites it means that many of them probably had to go to hospital for treatment, apart from the question of the many who were almost frightened to death.
228 But even if "only" 300 are severely injured, the Post Office must take the problem seriously. The phrase in the letter …we could encounter difficulties under the Protection of Animals Act, 1911 and the Firearms Act, 1937… set me wondering, because I read a similar phrase in a letter from the British agents of the American firm to which I referred. That letter stated: For your information, when we received details of this product the writer made contact with the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the Universities Federation for Animal Welfare and the Safety Services Branch of the General Post Office and also discussed the possible use of this product with the Metropolitan Police (Forensic Science Laboratory). All these contacts were not enthusiastic over the possible introduction of this product because of the risk of misuse. There seems to be another reason why the Post Office is not using this effective repellant, and I suspect that police objections may be behind it. I wonder why that should be? If dogs worry sheep—and sometimes they kill them—farmers often shoot and kill the dogs. If dogs kill foxes, which are themselves vicious killers, there is a league against what are called cruel sports, which receives much public support. Thus, while action is taken against dogs which worry sheep and foxes, if they worry human beings that is of no consequence. This would appear to be the attitude adopted in Britain and I find it a strange sense of priorities.
Only last week I read of a young girl who was taking her poodle on a lead for a walk when it was attacked by an alsatian. The girl tried to kick the alsatian away and at that point it turned on her. A man who was passing also tried to kick the alsatian away, but the man and girl had to stand helplessly by while the alsatian killed the poodle. This brings me——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I must remind the hon. Gentleman that he is seeking leave to introduce a Bill under the Ten Minutes Rule.

§ Mr. Doig
I will end my speech as quickly as possible, Mr. Speaker.
My aim is simply to enable people, and particularly postmen, to have the use of an effective repellant; and I have drawn attention to one which is effective and 229 which does no permanent damage to dogs.