Dog microchipping in UK by 2016 or pay fine

[Armstrongs]

Mr james white failed to point out this was a campaign for them in the know only such a move should of been made public to the effect it could not of been missed by all dog owners responceable or not and all dog owners given the chance to have there say. undemocratic lobbied for by self interested groups

Of course it's a self interested group! But it's not up to Guide Dogs to inform the rest of the populous.......is it?
It is, as it happens only a small part of the campaign by Guide Dogs.........to have every dog attack on an Assistance Dog prosecuted as if it were an attack on a human being.

I've been terrified to see a snarling, lunging dog, trying to get at a training puppy. Thankfully I had my eyesight and managed to give it a very wide berth. Imagine the consequences for someone who couldn't see.........it happens all the time!

I for one will be lobbying my MP to speak on my behalf again!

Yvonne

[sidthelamp]

Of course it's a self interested group! But it's not up to Guide Dogs to inform the rest of the populous.......is it?
It is, as it happens only a small part of the campaign by Guide Dogs.........to have every dog attack on an Assistance Dog prosecuted as if it were an attack on a human being.

I've been terrified to see a snarling, lunging dog, trying to get at a training puppy. Thankfully I had my eyesight and managed to give it a very wide berth. Imagine the consequences for someone who couldn't see.........it happens all the time!

I for one will be lobbying my MP to speak on my behalf again!

Yvonne

and just how do you suppose this legislation is going to stop dogs interacting with each other , just about the most stupid proposal ive ever heard

two dogs meet each other dont like each other snarl bark and you want the owners prosecuted even though it may be the guide dogs fault thats a big assumption and presumption the court will act in your favour thats the real truth of what you have done ,

i never said you did not have the right to campaign as a interested group i said any proposed law thats open to debate that effects every one should be in a widely seen public domain giving every one the right to consider the matter and voice there opinion which this debate leading to these new laws was not hiding the debate behind goverment web sites does not allow every one the chance to see whats being considered my point is upheld by the fact the results were publised in easily readable multi media outlets were as there was no announcement via the same channels of the start of the consultation. that amounts to lobbing by self interested groups at the exclusion of others.

while this pratice is becoming more common there will come a time when hidden lobbing to pass laws without general consent in favour of self interested parties will effect you in a negative sense and every one else

[sidthelamp]

just been looking into this matter a bit more the consultation period for interested parties was very short and the draft legislation drawn up soon after

Consultation start: 23 April 2012
Consultation end: 15 June 2012

no doubt only people in the know knew about the start and finish date of this proposal which finalised the ministers proposals, not democratic as far as im concerned

[Gothicina]

The second consultation WAS on the national news & in the media when the results of the first consultation were announced
http://www.itv.com/news/story/2012-04-23/dangerous-dog-laws/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17807349
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-16934451
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/dangerous-dogs-measures-dismissed-as-tinkering-7669379.html
http://jacksonblog.dailymail.co.uk/page/3/
http://www.countryside-alliance.org/...dangerous-dogs
http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/170/17/424.full


I'm pretty sure the biggest lobbyists for the changes to the laws in regard to dogs came from the Postal Workers!
http://www.cwu.org/political-progress.html

[sidthelamp]

The second consultation WAS on the national news & in the media when the results of the first consultation were announced
http://www.itv.com/news/story/2012-04-23/dangerous-dog-laws/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17807349
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-16934451
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/dangerous-dogs-measures-dismissed-as-tinkering-7669379.html
http://jacksonblog.dailymail.co.uk/page/3/
http://www.countryside-alliance.org/...dangerous-dogs
http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/170/17/424.full


I'm pretty sure the biggest lobbyists for the changes to the laws in regard to dogs came from the Postal Workers!
http://www.cwu.org/political-progress.html

the first link was announced on the day the consultation started gives the impression the proposals are already law and does not tell you how to voice your opinion with links to were you can have your say. reported yes on the afternoon slot but heavily biased in those in favour


second link aired the day before the consultation begins a fairer view with references to groups who disagree with the proposals, also giving the post office workers opinion,and makes it clear it is not yet law only a proposal much better unbiased reporting yet is let down by again no link or explanation to were you can have your say

third link although on subject is a statement not really relating to the english law proposals goes back nearly a year and has not been acted on. does giving a opposing point of view which is no doubt financial in its motives

the fourth link published the day the consultation started, a collection of like mined groups biased in one direction the only differing opinions were on how far the law should go, no opposing views reported no links or addmissions of the consultation process, publishing on the day the consultation started should of at least given people the ability to know of its exsistance and were to view and take part, also a hint of things to come with proposals of added insurance for all dog owners

the 5th link published one month into the consultation process seems to be about sentencing guide lines and fines related to dog attacks not directly linked to the consultation process the artical is in fact a blog
the artical does acknowlege the consultation process in passing with no links to it

the 6th link

a minority group although a large group a factual small discription of part of the proposal the only group who produced a link to have your say ! no bias in the small artical however is a old artical heres there take thats current

"The Countryside Alliance welcomes the Government's proposals for micro-chipping of dogs and other changes to dog control legislation.
Defra Secretary Owen Paterson has announced that all dogs will have to be micro-chipped by April 2016 and that the law will be changed so that owners can be prosecuted if their dog attacks someone whilst on private property where the dog is entitled to be.
Countryside Alliance Executive Chairman Barney White-Spunner said: "Micro-chipping is a positive step towards dealing with the thousands of dogs that stray or become lost every year and should ensure that they are re-united with their owners as quickly as possible. It is very important, however, that access to micro-chipping and training for those carrying out the procedure is both affordable and widely available in the countryside as well as towns.
"Responsible dog owners should have no concerns about the extension of the law onto private property, as well as public areas.
"Dog theft is a growing problem in many rural areas and has a devastating emotional as well as financial impact. Trained, pedigree dogs are a valuable commodity and are being targeted by professional gangs. The Government must ensure that there is no easy way of replacing or cloning micro-chip data and consider how micro-chipping can be used to counter this growing crime."

the 7th link hardley a well read or known of group its basicly the vets expressing there opinion in house on what they would like to see not really the place to read and link to public debate on legislation


so on the whole of the above links mainly biased opinion biased opinion based on the proposals were in only one case was a direct link given to express the readers views in not one place did you quote a neutral unbiased annoucment by the goverment were people could voice there opinion, which is my point. most of the links were published on or after the day the last consultation started . i conceed this has been rumbling on for nearly 3 years with various announcments . when the layman did finally find his way to the Defra web site all the proposals and links were available .

[shezz]

I got my dogs chipped when I first brought them.

They may not mean much to anyone else, but they are my dogs and part of my family, I Know that if they got out and they was picked up, at least they will be able to contact me.

my dogs a sloppy and wouldn't hurt a fly (I don't think) but to someone who don't know them, well they might look at them differently