Dogs (Hansard, 17 April 1985)

§ Mr. Colvin
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what are the present maximum penalties which may be imposed on persons in charge of dogs fouling the pavement; and whether he has any plans to increase these.

§ Mr. Mellor
Byelaws for this purpose are made under the general power conferred by section 235 of the Local Government Act 1972. The maximum penalty which may be imposed by byelaws made under this power was doubled to £100 last May. The Government have no plans to increase it further.

§ Mr. Colvin
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he has any plans to change the present legal definition of being in charge of a dog; and if he will make a statement.

§ Mr. Mellor
The Home Office model byelaw under which it is an offence for a person in charge of a dog to allow the dog to foul a footway or grass verge provides that, for the purposes of the byelaw, the owner of the dog shall be deemed in charge thereof, unless the court is satisfied that at the time when the dog fouled the footway or grass verge it had been placed in or taken into the charge of some other person. This definition was incorporated in the model byelaw in 1936 in response to representations from local authorities and in order to overcome difficulties caused by an earlier model byelaw. The model byelaw has been widely adopted, and I have no present reason to believe that the definition has given rise to problems or is in need of amendment.

§ Mr. Colvin
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will publish in the Official Report a table showing the total number of offences in connection with dogs for the last 12 months for which the statistics are available.

§ Mr. Mellor
The information available to me, which may be incomplete, relates to court proceedings for offences in connection with dogs and is published annually in "Criminal Statistics, England and Wales, Supplementary Tables, Volume 1" under offence classification 111 (offences relating to dogs) and 171 (revenue offence concerning dog licences). It is not possible to identify all offences that involved dogs; for example, details of offences of cruelty to animals do not distinguish the type of animal involved.