Proceeding contribution from Anne Snelgrove (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 14 March 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Animal Welfare Bill.
Animal Welfare Bill
That is entirely correct. Those who reached a decision one way or another—that did not include the Conservatives—indicated that they supported a total ban, which is why we are debating this issue today and having a free vote on it. An unscientific study by a Swedish German pointer breed society in 1989—my hon. Friend the Member for Cleethorpes (Shona McIsaac) mentioned it earlier—showed that of the 191 dogs studied, amputations had to be conducted on only seven. Therefore, 97 per cent. of those dogs did not need to be docked. In the light of robust evidence from Denmark and Norway, even if the pro-dockers are right and there is a 20 per cent. increase in tail injuries following a docking ban, which is doubtful, tail injuries would rise from under 0.037 per cent. to 0.044 per cent., leaving some 99 per cent. of dogs with healthy, uninjured tails.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 443 c1359
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Animal welfare Abuse Circuses Licensing Dogs Exemptions Domestic animals Internet Nature conservation Registration Sales Improvement notices
- Legislation
- Animal Welfare Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 10:46:41 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_307789
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_307789
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_307789