Proceeding contribution from Lord Redesdale (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Friday, 4 March 2011. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Dog Control Bill [HL].
Dog Control Bill [HL]
My Lords, I am certainly not arrogant enough to assume that I could dictate to the magistrates how they should look at the provision. They will do it on the evidence that is placed before them. However, the magistrates might take the opinion that a dog out of control on one occasion could be stopped from being out of control by being put on a lead. They would therefore go with the minor but effective measure of making sure that the person keeps the dog on a lead. If the person does not do that, it is a secondary issue and the situation will therefore become far more serious on a second offence. This was looked at particularly because of the issues that the noble Lord, Lord Richard, raised when I brought the Bill forward the first time round. I hope that he will take comfort from the fact that it was his intervention that first time which caused many hours of dispute on this subject. That is why many of the amendments have been drafted in the way that they have.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 725 c1302
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Animal welfare Dogs Domestic animals Local government Police Dangerous dogs
- Legislation
- Dog Control Bill (HL) 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 15:24:00 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_721217
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_721217
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_721217