When I finished speaking on the last occasion I had been saying that a further obstacle to effective enforcement of the existing control measures is the diffusion of responsibility between various Departments. The Bill, therefore, will entrust overall responsibility in the matter to the Minister for the Environment because of his involvement with local government, at which level the problems will be tackled on the ground. The major local authorities, namely the 27 county councils and five county borough corporations together with Dún Laoghaire Borough Corporation will administer the Act in their respective areas.
This will involve licensing dogs appointing dog wardens and providing dog shelters. The licence revenue which will accrue to the local authorities concerned in respect of dogs licensed in their respective areas is expected to be sufficient to cover the expenses incurred. It is envisaged that local authority areas with small dog populations and consequently low revenue will make appropriate arrangements with adjoining authorities for the operation of joint schemes. The intention is that the dog control measure will operate on a selffinancing basis.
I think all genuine dog lovers will have no compunction about paying the licence fee when they will have tangible evidence that the money is being utilised for a proper system of dog control. For some years the Department of the Environment have been encouraging local authorities to get involved in dog control and have been grant-aiding those who did get involved to the extent of 50 per cent of their costs. For this year, a sum of £125,000 has been provided in the Department of the Environment Estimates for the purpose and it is estimated that sums of £175,000 in 1987 will also be required.
At present 15 local authorities are involved actively in dog control and the powers which this Bill will give them will be of considerable help. Most of these local authorities engage the services of the ISPCA, who operate on an agency basis for the authorities concerned. It is proposed in the Bill to permit such arrangements to continue so that each local authority can decide to operate the scheme directly, or operate a joint scheme with another local authority, or have the scheme operated on their behalf by the ISPCA or other body concerned with animal welfare.
While there are many owners who exercise proper care and control of their dogs and due consideration for their neighbours there are, unfortunately, some who let their dogs run wild. This is the real problem and is the cause of sheep worrying, attacks on people, traffic accidents and so on. Until we get the loose dogs off our lands and streets we will not solve the problem and accordingly the Bill proposes that a loose dog which is not accompanied by any person and is outside the confines of the land or premises where it is kept will be regarded as a stray dog and will be seized by a dog warden. This is the core of the Bill and will give real teeth to those operating it. While the aim of the dog wardens will be to encourage and advise on responsible dog ownership, I recognise that there are those who will ignore such advice and these people must be dealt with in a different way.
In order to restrain impulsive buying of dogs, particularly as presents for children at Christmas and on other special occasions, I am providing in section 2 that a licence must be obtained in advance of the purchase of a dog. The section accordingly will make it unlawful to purchase or sell a dog which is not covered by a licence. We discussed this section at length in the Seanad where it was regarded as very important if the Act is to be effective.
Section 8 specifies the licence fees which are unchanged at £5 for a dog licence and £100 for a general dog licence. The Minister will have power to alter these rates by way of regulations or to specify different rates in respect of different classes of dogs. While it is not intended to specify different rates in the immediate future, it is considered prudent to provide the necessary powers in case at some future date it is considered desirable to adjust licence fees to distinguish between different beeds or sizes of dogs or between sterilised and unsterilised dogs.
Section 9 imposes an obligation on owners or other persons in charge of dogs to accompany them and keep them under effectual control when they are outside the confines of the premises where they are kept. Therefore, persons who permit their dogs to wander around the streets or, in a rural area, to move off their land will commit an offence under the Act. The existing law, under the Dogs Order, 1966, provides for control of dogs between sunset and sunrise only. The offence now being created is a new one, but it is essential that it be introduced if we are to have effective dog control. Wandering dogs, not under anybody's control, are a menace and are the cause of many serious incidents and their owners must be made accountable.
Section 11 is aimed at providing effective powers for ridding our towns and countryside of stray dogs. The existing law governing stray dogs is contained in the Dogs Act, 1906, and provides that a police officer who believes that a dog found in a highway or place of public resort is a stray dog may seize it. As I have stated already, it is inappropriate that primary responsibility for enforcement of these provisions should rest with the Garda Síochána and the section accordingly provides that dog wardens shall take all reasonable steps to seize stray dogs. This will impose an obligation on the warden to seize strays. The Garda under this section will continue to be empowered to seize strays, but it is envisaged that with an effective dog warden service in operation the services of the Garda will be rarely required. Section 15 imposes on each local authority the duty to employ at least one dog warden and to establish and maintain dog shelters. A local authority will, however, be empowered to delegate the entire dog control function to the ISPCA or, with the consent of the Minister, to a body connected with animal welfare. A local authority, again with the consent of the Minister, may delegate to any person the function of providing and running dog shelters and of dealing with the dogs therein.
Section 17 authorises local authorities to make by-laws relating to the control of dogs within their functional areas. Depending on the situation locally, each authority will have its own priorities and may or may not wish to impose controls, additional to those in the Bill, within its own area or within particular locations. The section lists specific controls which an authority may introduce, namely, requiring a person to remove the faeces where a dog has fouled a public place, specifying areas where dogs must be kept on a leash or where dogs, other than guide dogs, would be prohibited altogether. The environmental and public health aspects of dog faeces in urban areas are of increasing public concern and some public authorities in other countries have taken action to tackle this problem. I conside it desirable, therefore, to provide this enabling power should any of our local authorities wish to take similar action. I would like to emphasise that it is an enabling power and that the decisions in this area will rest with the elected representatives of the local authorities.
Opportunity is being taken in the Bill to increase the maximum fine for a conviction under the Protection of Animals Acts from £50 to £500 and this is provided for in section 20. It is provided also that fines may be increased in future by way of regulations; such regulations would require the prior approval of both Houses of the Oireachtas.
From an agricultural point of view, section 23 is important. Under the law as it stands — Dogs (Protection of Livestock) Act, 1960 — it is a good defence for shooting a dog if the defendant proves that the dog was shot when worrying livestock on agricultural land. I now propose that this provision be widened to permit the shooting of dogs worrying or about to worry livestock no matter where they are and of stray dogs which had not left the vicinity where livestock had been injured or killed and which could not be seized or identified.
Section 35 enables the Minister to extend the provisions of the Act relating to acceptance of unwanted dogs, the provision of shelters and the grant aiding of bodies providing shelters, to other pet animals. The limited service operating in some local authorities at present for dog control is providing a very useful service by taking in large numbers of unwanted cats as well as dogs. It is considered desirable, therefore, that the Bill should provide a statutory basis for that activity. I wish to emphasise that there is no question of wardens being involved in the seizure of cats. This provision is designed to facilitate the disposal of unwanted cats.
These are the salient features of the Bill which I commend to the House and in so doing I would like to thank all those who have contributed in some way to the preparation of this Bill, particularly the National Action Committee on Dog Control, the ISPCA, the Irish Kennel Club and the Advisory Council on Animal Health.
Before I conclude I would like to compliment the Members of the other House on their helpful and constructive contributions and I hope we will have a similar type of debate in this House. The Bill is long overdue. There is a crying demand for it. Each day as I open the paper I am terrified that I will see reports of this terrible saga that is happening year in and year out at about this time of the year of sheep being torn apart by ravaging dogs. I gave a commitment to the various groups of people, particularly those involved in sheep farming, to make a serious effort to conclude this Bill in time for the lambing season. I will be putting pressure on the Whips — and I know I will have the co-operation of Deputy Noonan and those on the other side of the House — to get to Committee Stage hopefully next week and have the Bill concluded before the Christmas.
