Animal Rescue Centres

[Sir Alec Shelbrooke in the Chair]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered e-petition 718660 relating to the licensing and regulation of animal rescue centres.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. I thank the petitioner Paul Watkinson and his colleague Niki Roe for their hard work in gathering almost 110,000 signatures for this petition, which is a fantastic achievement. The petition, which is entitled “Introduce Licensing and Regulation for Dog and Cat Rescues to Protect Welfare”, states:

“Many UK animal rescues operate without clear legal oversight, creating opportunities for unethical practices. Some rescues have been linked to supporting irresponsible breeding, neglecting animals, or misusing public donations.

Without enforceable standards, there is a risk that animals suffer in poor conditions, and public trust is undermined. We call on the Government to introduce mandatory licensing and regular inspections to ensure rescues operate transparently and uphold high welfare standards. Regulation is essential to prevent cruelty, improve accountability, and ensure all rescued animals receive proper care.

By introducing clear legal requirements, the Government can safeguard animal welfare, protect public confidence in rescues, and prevent organizations from operating irresponsibly.”

However, it is important to acknowledge that most animal rescues do great work.

Many activities associated with animals must already be licensed under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (England) Regulations 2018, including selling pets, providing boarding for cats and dogs, hiring out horses, dog breeding and keeping or training animals for exhibition. It is clearly not unusual for animal activities to be licensed, so the petitioner and many others believe that rescue and rehoming centres should be the next step.

In England, there is currently no statutory code for rescue centres; there are only voluntary frameworks. They include the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals code of practice for animal welfare establishments and the Association of Dogs and Cats Homes standards, to which the Government’s response refers. However, Scotland has already introduced a licensing system for dog and cat rescues under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (Scotland) Regulations 2021. Similarly, Wales has had a code of practice for animal welfare establishments since 2020. Its consultation on licensing animal welfare establishments found that 82% of respondents were in favour of licensing; the Welsh Government announced in June 2025 that they would prioritise taking forth the proposals of the consultation. England now has a great opportunity to join the rest of Great Britain and catch up with licensing these organisations.

There are many establishments that are not meeting standards but have good intentions. Well-meaning individuals can find themselves out of their depth and have no structure or training to know what is best. Once organisations are known to be local rescues, they can be inundated with animals left on their doorstep. A lack of knowledge and training is putting animals at risk, along with staff exhausted by malpractice and people who choose to adopt from the rescue. It is important for the law to draw a distinction between being a cat lady and being an unofficial rescue that is overcrowded with animals. Unfortunately, there are also cases of people running rescue homes with financial and malicious motivations. The worst scenarios include very dangerous practices, including rogue traders masquerading to the public as something they are not.

Nobody wants to close small organisations, so it is important that smaller dog and cat rescues be supported through a transition and that cats and dogs be moved to other rescues where it is completely necessary. Rescuers should have the opportunity to move through legislation and structure and be supported with grants, for example from the Association of Dogs and Cats Homes. Work is already going on between small organisations and the bigger charities: larger groups can advise and support the smaller organisations. That would continue as we transitioned to a licensing model.

Under the current laws, anyone can set up a rescue. I think we would all agree that is not acceptable. The fact that there are no standards or training can lead to the illegal import of animals, the outbreak of disease and poor hygiene standards. Without regulation, those dangerous practices will only continue. Nor have we any data on how widespread they may be, as without legislation there is no formal tracking of dog and cat rescue homes across the country.

We know that the current system is not working, as we know of many sorry cases in which it has failed. When I met staff from the Blue Cross, they told me about the many animals that they had found being kept in inappropriate circumstances for long periods. For example, one dog had lived in a blank kennel for eight years with no kind of enrichment. The rescue thought that the dog was simply sedate, but really he had just given up on life. The Animal Welfare Act 2006 is not sufficient: it keeps an animal alive, with a safe environment, diet and housing, but it does not address the specific issues that arise in rescue shelters, such as the spread of disease.

Dog and cat rescues should ensure that pets are safe and suitable to go back into the public domain, and that they have a good quality of life over long periods. The Animal Welfare Act states that local authorities

“may prosecute proceedings for any offence under this Act”,

But that relies on individuals whistleblowing on offending organisations. That can allow suffering to carry on far too long.

There are already many examples on which legislation could be based—Scotland’s legislation, the Welsh code of practice, the RSPCA standards and the Association of Dogs and Cats Homes standards. The foundations are already there. The sector is aligned on the need for action, as I am sure the upcoming consultation will show.

I thank the 145 signatories to the petition from Bournemouth East; I also thank Staffie and Stray Rescue, Waggy Tails Rescue Dorset and Margaret Green Animal Rescue, alongside Cats Protection and the RSPCA, for all that they do in my constituency. My hon. Friend mentions the Government’s recently announced plan to consult on the issue. Does she agree that we need a publicly accessible national database of animal welfare establishments? That is the only way in which the rescue and rehoming centres that ensure that abandoned or lost animals have a safe place and a second chance can truly be supported.

I agree that that would be a good step forward. It is also important to strike an appropriate balance when setting regulations. If regulations are too exacting, people may begin to shop rather than adopt, possibly importing from abroad. Another common issue is that dog and cat homes often end up taking in other species—so-called exotic pets or wild animals, for example—that they may not be qualified to take in. In future, it may be worth looking at regulating all forms of animal rescue centre to prevent the abuse of all species. The enforcement of any future animal welfare legislation is key, because otherwise new licensing will not be effective. It is important that the local authorities that will inspect the organisations be upskilled and capable of dealing with new, rigorous systems.

Although the petition closed in October 2025, the Government responded in July 2025, advising that all animal rescue organisations have to meet existing protections under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, and that individuals contact the local authority if an organisation is not meeting them. Their response also advised that members of the public can check whether a rescue centre is a member of the Association of Dogs and Cats Homes, which has standards for rehoming, neutering and training, among many other matters.

It is important to consider that the Government’s new animal welfare strategy, which was launched in December 2025, addresses the topic of dog and cat rescues. I am happy to see the actions outlined in the strategy, including the commitment to launch a consultation on licensing rescue and rehoming organisations and developing the evidence base on welfare issues.

Rescue animals are some of the most vulnerable animals. It is important that as lawmakers we do our best to fully protect them. Being a registered rescue should not be voluntary, and the Government are right to take steps to address the issue. It is important that when we set goals such as these, we have a clear road map. I look forward to the Minister’s response and am keen to hear the timelines associated with the consultation.

Order. I remind hon. Members that they should bob if they wish to catch my eye, and that if they wish to be called to speak they must have been present at the start of the debate. It may help Members and those viewing the proceedings to know that I shall call the Front-Bench spokespeople by 7 pm. Not many people are in for this debate, so I am sure that all the points that Members want to make can be explored.

It is a pleasure to speak under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. I thank everybody involved with the petition, whether they put their name to it or got it off the ground.

Just outside my constituency of South Basildon and East Thurrock, there was an incident in which the remains of 37 dogs were found, along with 20 other living dogs, in varying states of ill health. It should go without saying that this was a deeply distressing incident locally and for everyone who became aware of it. Rightly, it shocked residents, generated significant local concern and led to more than 1,000 of my constituents signing this petition. Animals suffered, and that must never be minimised.

What troubled many people locally was not simply what happened, but the response. Basildon council confirmed to my office that no licensing breaches had occurred—not because conditions were acceptable, but because animal rescue and rehoming centres do not currently require any licensing at all. That immediately raises a serious question: was this a failure of the law, or a failure of the use of laws that already exist?

Under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, there is already a clear legal duty on any person responsible for animals to ensure their welfare, including through proper care, a suitable environment, protection from suffering and timely veterinary treatment. The Act provides powers for enforcement, improvement notices and prosecution where standards fall short. Local authorities also retain powers on environmental health and on statutory nuisance and partnerships with police and animal welfare bodies, where conditions pose a risk to animals or the public.

The Environmental Protection Act 1990, the public health Acts, the Housing Act 2004—if the animal welfare unit is a domestic premises—and the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 are all additional existing laws that are in effect and which could be used in scenarios in which we believe that animals are being mistreated. Yet, in this case, concerns were reportedly raised months before any meaningful action was taken. That points not just to a legislative gap, but to questions around resources, clarity of responsibility and enforcement confidence.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) for introducing the debate. I was privileged recently to meet the lead petitioners—Paul Watkinson and Niki Roe of Jack’s Giant Journey, who are in the Public Gallery today—to discuss the issues that dog rescue centres face. I also thank the 175 constituents from Newport West and Islwyn who signed the petition.

Although animal welfare is a devolved issue, Scotland is currently the only constituent nation of the UK in which animal rescues and shelters are licensed. There is much to be learned from that experience as Welsh and UK Government Ministers develop proposals for licensing regimes in Wales and England respectively.

I greatly welcome the Welsh Labour Government’s commitments to introduce regulations for animal rescues, sanctuaries and rehoming centres, following clear support in consultation in 2024. The measures will go a long way toward protecting animals and ensuring effective minimum standards for those sadly much-needed institutions. I look forward to taking those commitments to doorsteps across Casnewydd Islwyn ahead of May’s Senedd elections. I encourage the Minister, when taking proposals forward in England, to look at the responses to the Welsh Government’s 2024 consultation and to talk with Welsh Government colleagues about the work that they have already done in developing a licensing scheme. Let us learn from one another as we work together to level up animal protections across the UK.

Currently in England and in Wales, anyone, regardless of competence, premises, finances or track record, can set up a rescue and take in animals and charge fees, and they will face scrutiny only once things have gone badly wrong. We have all seen the most extreme cases pop up on our TV screens and news apps. The hon. Member for South Basildon and East Thurrock (James McMurdock) mentioned the 37 dead dogs and 20 live animals seized in Basildon and Billericay in May last year, and almost 100 animals were seized from an animal sanctuary in Lincolnshire in 2024.

My hon. Friend is a real champion of these issues, so I thank her for her work. My constituency is home to the Radcliffe animal centre. It is the only RSPCA animal centre in Nottinghamshire, but what most people do not realise is that the centre is still funded individually—independently—not by the national society, and it costs £800,000 a year to run. Does my hon. Friend agree that there is a need to invest in the capacity of the sector and to look at funding of these centres, to ensure that we reach the standards that she is describing?

My hon. Friend makes an excellent point. This is about consistency, levelling up and ensuring that across the UK we are all operating to those standards, so I thank him for that intervention.

People need to know the animal they are adopting. A lack of screening also presents major biosecurity concerns. A University of Liverpool study found that 15% of imported dogs that were tested had Leishmania infantum—a parasitic disease uncommon in the UK —despite 93% of the tested dogs’ owners believing that a vet had given their dog a clean bill of health. Any new licensing regime must ensure that rescue centres accept only animals imported with full documentation verifying origin and veterinary health. Medical checks must also be undertaken prior to rehoming.

Rogue operators often rehome animals with no regard for their behaviour, putting vulnerable people at risk and potentially worsening the surge in dog-related violence we have seen in recent years. Hospital admissions for dog bites have risen by 47% over the past 10 years, costing the NHS more than £71 million a year. In my county, Gwent, 539 dog attacks were reported to the police last year, an increase of more than a quarter on 2024.

We cannot allow the supply of dogs to become dominated by dodgy breeders and rogue rescue centres. That is why any new licensing regime must be outcome-focused, with minimum requirements for enrichment and behavioural support, as well as a behavioural assessment prior to rehoming. Rehoming animals with unaddressed behavioural issues only puts people at risk.

In introducing such a scheme, UK and Welsh Ministers must learn the lessons from Scotland. Small, independent foster-based rescue centres are a critical part of the animal welfare landscape, with independents outnumbering the major charity sites by almost 10 to one. In Scotland, many of these were forced to close after 2021, when the Scottish Government tied licensing to charity status and a minimum turnover of £5,000. Those closures came despite many foster-based rescue centres having excellent welfare standards. I urge the Minister not to replicate this mistake, and to ensure that any new licensing regime incorporates smaller rescue centres. In recognising this diversity of high-welfare provision, I also ask the Minister to consider a tiered approach to any new licensing fees, thereby reducing the disproportionate burden that could be created for smaller, high-welfare rescues.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) for securing this debate on a very important issue to many of my residents.

The discovery of dozens of deceased dogs at the South Essex rehoming facility last year brought the consequences of the lack of regulation for animal rescue centres into sharp focus. That case is progressing through the courts, and I know that many constituents have closely followed developments, including my daughter, who is probably monitoring my attendance here. I used to be the most important male in her life, but I have been replaced by Caesar, a five-year-old ragdoll cat. Anyway, I digress.

While most rehoming and rescue centres operate to high standards, I share the concerns of residents who feel that without regulation, both animals and their owners face unnecessary risks. In the UK, we have robust animal welfare laws that regulate services including pet boarding and breeding, yet oversight of rehoming centres remains a blind spot. As it stands, anyone in England, Wales or Northern Ireland can set themselves up as a rehoming organisation without any licensing or inspection requirements. The decision to hand over a pet to a rehoming centre is an incredibly hard one to make, and those who take that decision deserve to have full confidence in the quality of care that they are promised.

I welcome the Government’s work on an integrated approach to improving animal welfare, including tackling puppy smuggling and puppy farming. I hope they will pay adequate attention to the regulation of rehoming and rescue centres. The thousands of signatures that this petition has collected, including 647 from Southend East and Rochford alone, demonstrate the scale of concern. I am grateful that the issue is getting the attention it deserves.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. I thank my constituency neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) for securing this debate. I declare an interest as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on cats.

Across the United Kingdom, nearly 60% of households own a pet, and around 10.2 million of those pets are cats. They bring comfort, companionship and a great deal of amusement to millions of families. I know that personally, because I am owned by two rescue cats, Clement Cattlee and Mo Meowlam. Vital to the welfare of those pets and their future are our rescue and rehoming centres, such as Johnstone Cat Rescue in my constituency. Those organisations carry out extraordinary work, but beyond the duty of care established in the Animal Welfare Act, there are no specific statutory requirements governing how those services operate. As a result standards vary wildly across the sector. That is deeply unfair to the many outstanding providers that deliver a genuine and professional service through the dedication and compassion of their staff and volunteers.

Sadly, as so often is the case, it is the few that fall short that cast a shadow over the many, and it is because of such cases that we are debating this issue today. Too often, lack of training, resources or proper oversight means that even well-intentioned providers fail to meet the standard of care that our cats deserve. In more troubling cases, animals are placed in foster or rehoming centres where due care and attention are simply not given.

I will give one example. Linda, a volunteer at her local cat protection charity, saw a photograph of a kitten advertised by a local rescue centre and wanted to offer it a loving home. She completed an online form and later received a brief telephone call. During that call, she was not asked about her lifestyle, her living arrangements or whether she had any other pets, and she was given no meaningful information about the kitten’s health, background or needs; she was told only that it was three months old. She paid an adoption fee over the phone and was given an address from which to collect the kitten a few days later.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) for securing the debate. I pay tribute to the campaigners, who are with us today, for the opportunity to raise this issue, which is of deep concern to many of my constituents, as well as to people across the northern parishes and indeed the whole country.

Across all our communities, rescue centres play an extraordinary role: they step in when animals are abandoned or neglected, or when they can simply no longer be cared for. They do so largely through the dedication of volunteers, through donations and though good will, and their work is often unseen but invaluable.

However, unlike kennels and breeders, animal rescue centres in England currently operate without a clear, consistent national licensing framework. There are proposals that would address that gap, using the model that already exists under other legislation. That would not create a new system from scratch, but extend a familiar and well-understood framework to a sector that is currently insufficiently regulated.

We know that that approach can work, because it works elsewhere. As has been mentioned, Scotland already has licensed animal shelters, and I am reliably informed that Wales is committed to introducing legislation too. That means that England is now the only part of Great Britain without a formal system of oversight. Introducing such a system would simply bring England into line with best practice across the rest of the country.

There is strong support for that across the rescue and veterinary community. The RSPCA and Dogs Trust have publicly welcomed the discussion about licensing, and colleagues across the House have also expressed their support. This is an issue on which there is genuine cross-party and evidence-based agreement, focused solely on improving animal welfare.