Details HERE :(

Alarm bells are ringing!

Loudly!

http://www.apgaw.org/news.asp?newsID=33
Further info here.  There is an email address for anyone who would like to get in touch with them.

Well I don't usually do this kind of thing but I have just sent an e-mail to them!

This looks like big trouble!

why just preddigee breeding.
why not all dogs?

probably because they see pedigree breeders as raking in the money .....if only !!!!!!!!!!!

Do a lot more for canien welfare if they looked at casual breeding.

> Do a lot more for canien welfare if they looked at casual breeding.

Exactly. I feel a letter brewing. Thanks for link. I'm going to share this with my friends and encourage them to write as well. Not good :(

Well, interesting posts on Teri's link to the newspaper.  Is it too late for a petition at this stage?  I am no good at letters (I'm a bit tactless and blunt which means I won't be up for promotion any time soon) but I would be glad (as a concerned pet owner of pedigree dogs) to put my name/signature to a letter somebody else has written.  Perhaps names/signatures in bulk would get noticed more?

<Is it too late for a petition at this stage>

Granitecitygirl, in law a petition counts as one signature, even if 1,000 people sign. It's much more effective to identify a few key concerns in a template letter and then have each person cut and paste them into their own letter to their MP and cc to the committee.

Petitions are good for photo opportunities (e.g. protesters hand it over to a Downing Street security officer) but rubbish for anything else.

Hi GCG

I'm inclined to think that if they are buried to their eyeballs with individual letters or emails they may just take more notice but TBH I think the time has been and gone when a petition will make any difference.  After all the 'other side' some time ago organised a petition looking for the very things we hold most dear to be taken over by a government department - the ball is in their court and appears it's going to be retained there

Had the KC shown half of the savvy required by any institution being hammered in the media, they would have engaged a PR firm to ensure that they (the KC) got as much if not more publicity than those who knock them and perhaps had that happened they would have enjoyed more credibility than they currently have and certainly managed to prevent the poor publicity that they have attracted being the lasting impression on GP.

We are in an age where spin doctors direct and dictate the image presented and perpetuated - not headless chickens :(

Oh dear, more fall out from that programme.  It seems like every week something new is trying to or is being brought in.  I think dog breeds are all going to end up as rare breeds if some of these plans go ahead.

Emma

Oh dear.  Well, hopefully somebody somewhere will see some sense.  I was worried that it was far too late.

Never knew that about petitions only counting as 1 sig in law, thanks.

http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/welfare-dogs-cop/
i see they want comments by dec 30th...but when did it all come out in the 1st place??? it makes very very scarey reading....the police state is coming!

Have any of you written to the group yet and received a response?

I have, asking for information re how to submit, I have received a reply tonight from the lady named with an address c/o RSPCA External affairs.

I've had a reply and it was a better one than you usually get and seemed to be wanting to look into everything.  Sent it a few weeks ago and got the reply yesterday.

Do you know which 12 MP's are making up the group and their credentials re animal's?

In addition, the Breeding of Dogs Act 1991 extended the powers of local authorities to obtain a warrant to enter any premises, excluding a private dwelling house, in which it is believed that a dog breeding business is being carried out. All outbuildings, garages and sheds are open to

Haven't got time to read the whole document, will do later, but in just skimming through, just pulled out this bit, I'm actually not against everyone who breeds needing a license, IMO it is a good thing for everyone to be inspected etc, but why is there going to be this huge pocket of not entering private dwelling houses for inspection, look how many times we have read of puppy buyers walking into houses with crates of dogs, or unkept animals, it's a big, big gap, as (I have no figures to hand) but I believe most dogs registered by just the KC never mind unregistered come from BYB's alone, why will there be no warrant access to these premises?

What's the point in just going after the large puppy farmers, as this is all that the bill is for, and hasn't that always been there anyway?

I'm sure there are lots more good points in the document, restrictions on dog ownership haven't found yet.

I asked before about making a submission to this group but am now seriously concerned about doing so, after reading the c/o RSPCA bit!
 
So I went checking and found that they are supported by the RSPCA,

CONTACT DETAILS FOR CORRESPONDENCE AND GENERAL ENQUIRIES ABOUT THE GROUP 
Mr Eric Martlew MP, House of Commons, London SW1A OAA. Tel: 020 7219 4114 
BENEFITS RECEIVED BY GROUP FROM SOURCES OUTSIDE PARLIAMENT 
Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) provides group's secretariat (organising meetings and events and general admin). 

My question is if the RSPCA are giving support via staff and meetings, admin etc will they not get to see our Submissions BEFORE the MP's?
As all evidence is to be submitted electronically just how much of our original material, if any, will actually get to the MP's?
Will the RSPCA be restricted to the 2,000 word limit the rest of us are bound by?

Surely this is a conflict of interests and as such the RSPCA political officer dealing with this group should excuse herself based on that conflict of interest?  Not that is individual is the first RSPCA worker to give support to the Group obviously as the RSPCA provide the groups Secretariat ergo one is led to believe they have always done so.

> Surely this is a conflict of interests and as such the RSPCA political officer dealing with this group should excuse herself based on that conflict of interest?

Yes it is, and yes she should - but I bet she won't :(

Then why don't you search out the MPs on the list and write to them, submitting a copy to the RSPCA? Thats what I would do.

The admin post for APGAW is funded by the RSPCA but is totally independent of it. No evidence submitted to APGAW is fielded to or filtered by the RSPCA.

If anyone would like clarification, they should contact Marisa Heath directly. Her email is:

admin@apgaw.org

> No evidence submitted to APGAW is fielded to or filtered by the RSPCA.
>

Allegedly ;)

Hi Polly I'm still awaiting a list of the MP's involved in this particular study from Marisa once I have it I will be doing exactly that ie submitting via post to each individual, her email suggests there are different MP's for different studies "I have been in the process of forming the group and now have the 12 political members in place which means we are ready to start the investigation."  As the post is part time I'm not sure if there will be a reply before the New Year but as cut off date isn't until 1st feb I'm not too worried about that.  I am also writing to my own MP to voice my concerns about this group's connection to the RSPCA, causing a 'Conflict of Interest'

Jemima I am sure you would have a different view if it were funded by the Kennel Club!  Many other animals are bred to a specific breed standard, horses, cattle, sheep, pigs, budgies, canaries, poultry, geese, ducks, guinea pigs, fish, rabbits, cats, hamsters so why are the investigating just pedigree dogs, if they have an issue with a breed standard that should be an issue across the whole spectrum of pedigree breeding.

> Jemima I am sure you would have a different view if it were funded by the Kennel Club!

I do understand the concern as I queried it too. I was reassured that APGAW is fully independent but of course you may not be - and indeed from what I hear it would appear that the KC is not very convinced. But I would say this in APGAW's defence - Marisa Heath is not the one making decisions - it will be the MPs. And remember that there are some very pro KC MPs involved with APGAW such as Roger Gale. Additionally, APGAW has contributed in exploring other animal welfare issues that I would imagine many here would support.

Whatever, I would suggest that it is important for APGAW to hear from all sides.

APGAW were involved in the regulation of the greyhound racing industry. They are involved in other similar committees.