Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill

Second Reading

Moved by

That the Bill be now read a second time.

My Lords, I hope that noble Lords will know of my enduring commitment to animal welfare. As a veterinary surgeon and co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Animal Welfare, I have tried to be a vocal advocate on a range of animal health and welfare issues.

I am honoured to present the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill to the House today. I thank all those involved with its successful passage in the Commons, notably the Member for Winchester, Dr Danny Chambers. It is a real pleasure to acknowledge Danny’s contribution, because I was privileged to be one of his academic teachers at the University of Liverpool’s veterinary school when he was a student and I the dean; I got to know him very well at that time. I was heartened to see how well the Bill was received in the Commons, and I am confident that it will achieve broad support in the House of Lords and that, together, we can tackle the illegal pet trade that causes such substantial welfare harm to our most popular pets.

It might be useful to outline briefly some of the history that has led us to the current situation. The Bill covers dogs, cats, and ferrets for two reasons. First and specifically, because they are all highly susceptible to rabies, a terrible and universally lethal viral disease, affecting both animals and humans. Because of their close contact with humans, those species are the most likely source of rabies infections in humans. Secondly, because of more recent criminal misuse of the existing travel rules, the welfare of our most popular pets is being seriously compromised. Before 2000, the UK kept our animals and us free of rabies by requiring all imported dogs, cats and ferrets to undergo six months of quarantine. However, with the advent of effective vaccines for dogs, cats and ferrets, and increasing human travel, substantial public pressure grew to replace quarantine with compulsory rabies vaccinations, thereby allowing people in the United Kingdom to take their pets abroad, often to Europe, and back without quarantine. Since then, however, there has been a huge increase in pet movements, and data from the Animal and Plant Health Agency shows that the number of non-commercial pet movements in 2011 of 100,000 rose to over 368,000 in 2024. That was compared with figures from a 1995 Hansard, which suggest that approximately only 8,000 dogs, cats or ferrets were imported per year before quarantine was abolished.

This huge increase gives rise to concerns that the less stringent pet travel requirements intended for genuine pet owners are being abused by commercial traders, who are moving pets for sale or rehoming, and taking advantage of the increased demand for pets, particularly dogs. Published sources have estimated that we need approximately 950,000 puppies per year in the UK to maintain our current dog population, but there is insufficient UK supply to provide those numbers. Sadly, but not unexpectedly, some of this demand is therefore being met through the illegal imports of young dogs. In 2021, for example, an investigation by FOUR PAWS International found that about 50% of puppy adverts surveyed on the UK’s Gumtree website were found to be of illegal imported origin.

My Lords, I support the Bill and thank our two parliamentary veterinary Members, Dr Danny Chambers in the other place and the noble Lord, Lord Trees, for their sponsorship of this measure, introduced with the backing and support of the Government. This is an enabling Bill, setting minimum thresholds on welfare and conditions for the importation of dogs, cats and ferrets, long linked through their susceptibility to rabies. That subsequent and changeable regulations can be introduced following this measure to combat further ingenious exploitations of potential loopholes is to be welcomed as a step change in effective control.

I received many submissions on animal welfare, on dogs in particular, and I declare my interest as a BVA honorary associate. I thank all those who have written to me, and the British Veterinary Association in particular, which has conducted many surveys of its members, who have to deal with the unfortunate consequences of the huge rise in puppy smuggling. I also thank Andreas Milligan of the Metropolitan Police, a police dog handler who is familiar with the circumstances behind this trade, the abuses that occur and the necessary measures to combat them.

This Bill is important to deter the smugglers, improve the welfare of pets during non-commercial importation, reduce the risk of zoonotic diseases entering the UK, and protect potential customers. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Trees, for his excellent introduction to the Bill.

If I have one reservation about the Bill, it concerns what happens to seized pets detained at the borders. The Bill makes little mention of them other than in Clause 1(6) and (7). Can the House understand what provision is envisaged under forthcoming regulations? Clause 1(7)(a) allows for

“a specified person to meet the costs of detaining”

the animal. Crucially, Clause 1(7)(b) enables

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Trees, for setting out the detail of this Bill and for his long-standing commitment to animal welfare—and, indeed, human welfare. He makes a compelling case for its swift introduction, and I am grateful to him and the Minister for the meeting earlier to discuss the details of the Bill.

I fully support this Bill and hope that it will move through this place quickly and unamended. We know why it is important. We are seeing the exploitation of the current non-commercial route system of imports, and this is impacting animal welfare. We have all heard distressing stories about the treatment of animals being imported through this non-commercial route. We are seeing a burgeoning illegal trade, where criminals are exploiting the current system in an organised and lucrative way, with a clear focus on money rather than the health and welfare of animals. We are seeing a lack of consumer protection, with well-meaning potential pet owners finding it difficult to get the knowledge and reassurance that they would like. So I fully support this Bill, and I hope that in her response, the Minister can come back on a few points.

First, I would like to hear more about enforcement: have the provisions in the Bill been discussed with the police and Border Force, and do they feel that they are sufficient? Secondly, like the noble Lord, Lord Grantchester, we have been contacted by organisations concerned that the Bill will stop the rescue and bringing in of animals that have been mistreated through mutilation. Can the Minister confirm whether these organisations should be using the commercial or non-commercial route? If the reduction of the number of animals allowed to five per vehicle, rather than five per person, is not sufficient to stop bad practice, can she confirm that this could be reduced further, though not increased, through secondary legislation? I do not think that we should risk losing this Bill, as we have done previously, by bringing forward any amendments, but I should be grateful if the Minister could provide some reassurance on those points.

My Lords, I strongly support this long-overdue Bill and congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Trees, on skilfully steering it through this House. My noble friend Lady Fookes has asked me to say how much she wishes she had been able to be here—she is at a long-standing event for the War Widows’ Association—and that she, too, supports the Bill.

I want to talk specifically about the plight of cats and kittens being smuggled into the country. I declare an interest as patron of International Cat Care. I am also grateful to Cats Protection and Battersea for their tireless work in this area. I declare an interest as a cat owner, as I know is the Minister, proud owner of Sid. The commercial market for cats has been changing over the last few years. Cats Protection’s Cats and Their Stats report for 2024 revealed a significant rise in the number of pure bred and pedigree cats in the UK. For the first time, the number of these cats acquired over the last year has overtaken the market for moggies like my own, with significant consequences because of the increase in the smuggling of such cats from abroad. According to the Cats Protection survey, 4% of the cats acquired in the 12-month survey period were from abroad. That is an astonishing 65,000 cats and kittens.

As any cat owner knows simply from a visit to the vet, travel is very traumatic for most cats, particularly for very young ones. It causes severe stress, in turn causing serious clinical symptoms. Yet far too many cats are being transported or smuggled into this country in distressing conditions, often many in a vehicle at the same time. This Bill will help tackle the problem by banning the import of kittens under six months and of pregnant cats in the last one-third of their gestation period, and reducing the number of cats that can enter in a single motor vehicle to five. That is still a large number and, ideally, I think that number should be three per vehicle, which is still a significant number and would not impact in any way on the vast majority of UK cat owners. Perhaps the Minister can explain why the number was set at five, not three.

My Lords, when I first read the Title of this Bill, I did wonder about the ferrets, but now I understand, because dogs, cats and ferrets can carry rabies and are kept as pets—although I have never kept a ferret, but, obviously, who knows about the future?

I do not often agree with the noble Lord, Lord Black, but I agreed with his closing statement about the need for speed. This is obviously an outline; it will need a lot of subsequent work from all sorts of stakeholders to make sure that it becomes binding legislation, so that it is clear that we can catch criminal gangs and put disturbed, traumatised, vulnerable animals out of their desperate straits.

I strongly support this Bill, as does the Green Party. It seeks to improve animal welfare and reduce the illegal, criminal exploitation of non-commercial pet travel rules. This Bill is apparently also known as the puppy smuggling Bill, because criminal gangs have been exploiting loopholes in the law and avoiding health and welfare checks that the UK strongly requires. This process is going to need a lot of work in future to stop all further illegal exploitation. To stop animals being imported, having experienced great cruelty and becoming very traumatised, is going to be a lot of work. I loathe the whole idea of subsequent legislation that we never get to comment on, but it is, in this case, absolutely crucial.

We know that heavily pregnant bitches are sent in cramped conditions without concern for their well-being or their future. Puppies are removed from their mothers at too young an age, transported in unsafe conditions, possibly unvaccinated, often with mutilations such as docked ears or tails, or cats are declawed. When I first read that, and even reading it now, it made me feel quite ill that we can treat animals in this way.

Having read the background to this Bill, the many emails and briefings, I thank people who have written to me to say that they have fears about the legislation. I understand those fears, and I accept that there could be problems going forward, but I am afraid that this is a Bill that has its time, and its time is now. When I read about animals in war zones that need rescuing and rehoming, I feel incredibly sad for them, but at the same time we have to be sure that here in the UK we have stringent welfare conditions for our animals. Of course, I thank Battersea Dogs & Cats Home for its excellent briefing and strong push to support this Bill. Similar Bills have failed in the past, but we cannot afford to let this Bill not be passed and become legislation, and I look forward to co-operation on all sides of the House. How unusual to have a Bill that everybody supports. It is a real pleasure.

My Lords, I welcome this Bill, so ably introduced by the noble Lord, Lord Trees. His veterinarian background gives him great knowledge of and expertise in animals and animal welfare.

I declare an interest as a lover of animals and the proud owner of two dogs and a horse. The thought of animal cruelty is absolutely abhorrent, as is the thought that criminal gangs can dupe new owners into buying sick pets, so I am delighted to support this Bill. Animal welfare is a cause very close to my heart; I spent nine years on the Farm Animal Welfare Council, and I am an honorary BVA associate.

As the noble Baroness, Lady Jones, just said, it is so good to speak on an issue where there has been so much cross-party support, both in the other place and on these Benches today. It carries on the work agreed under the last Government and the former Conservative MP for North Devon, Selaine Saxby, who led the last version of the Bill until it failed simply due to the general election. This Bill has attracted a wealth of backing from the public. I thank the Countryside Alliance, the BVA, the Dogs Trust, Battersea Dogs & Cats Home and other organisations for all their briefings.

As we know, the British are a nation of animal lovers. Dog ownership skyrocketed during Covid. As we heard from the noble Lord, Lord Trees, it has become difficult to fulfil demand in recent years as we do not have enough dog breeders in the UK. If people cannot find an animal in the UK, they look to bring one in from abroad.

As we have heard, the Bill seeks to address animal welfare criminality in the pet trade, and to protect consumers by stopping the illegal trade. Over recent years there has been much in the press, particularly about puppy smuggling and its abuses; my noble friend Lord Black spoke eloquently about the smuggling of cats as well. I gather that in 2023 around 320,000 dogs were imported under travel pet schemes. It can be a very lucrative operation; therefore, it definitely needs strict controls to clamp down on it. However, we must emphasise to the general public that it is perfectly possibly to import a puppy legally, as many people do.

My Lords, I thank my noble friend Lord Trees for his introduction to the Bill. I wish the House to note my registered interests. First, I have been a dog owner for many years, enjoying the benefits, both physically and mentally, of owning one for so long. I also work for, and am a shareholder in, a large independent veterinary practice, and I represent an organisation on the British Veterinary Association’s council.

I fully support this important Bill as a supporter of animal welfare. I know how critical it is that this House does its job and scrutinises the Bill, but I hope that we do not table any amendments that may change the Bill and instead make these changes via secondary legislation, as other Peers have stated. I congratulate Danny Chambers MP on bringing the Bill back to the Commons and through its stages in the other place. I also thank the Government—especially the Minister, the noble Baroness, Lady Hayman of Ullock—for supporting the Bill.

I turn to some of the reasons why the Bill is so important. First, my noble friend Lord Trees mentioned biosecurity. We are rabies-free, and we must continue to be so. Also, the veterinary industry has seen a rise in the number of cases of the infectious disease brucellosis, which has increased due to the import of dogs. This disease is highly infectious, and pet owners and veterinary staff handling pets are at risk. At our practice, if dogs are tested and found to be infected, in most cases we would recommend euthanasia, which is an awful outcome and is distressing for both the pet—obviously—and its owners.

Hundreds of thousands of dogs, cats and ferrets are imported illegally into this country in poor conditions. They suffer long journeys when very young or when heavily pregnant, which is not good and awfully cruel. We also need to close the loophole that allows the cruel, illegal mutilation of dogs’ ears, tail docking and the declawing of cats by uncaring, fashion-obsessed pet owners who claim that these pets are imported. We need to improve the protections for the pet-owning, pet-purchasing public so that they can buy pets that have had reasonable upbringings.

My Lords, I also thank the noble Lord, Lord Trees, for sponsoring the Bill. I welcome this latest iteration and the Government’s support for it. It is only right that we on these Benches acknowledge that we initially introduced it but failed to bring it to fruition. Because it has taken us so long to get to this point, there is definitely a feeling of, “Let’s just get this done”. In that spirit, I will make only a couple of points; they were made way back when but are, I think, worth mentioning again now.

As others have mentioned, it is good news that the change in the non-commercial pet travel rules will reduce the number of animals that can be brought into the country from five per person to five per vehicle. Like the noble Lord, Lord Black of Brentwood, I would be interested to know how that figure was reached. Perhaps the Minister could explain the thinking in her response.

The Dogs Trust national dogs survey in 2021, based on responses from over 240,000 owners, estimated that 97.7% of them had three dogs or fewer. Despite the drastic reduction, five still seems a generous, and potentially even unnecessary, figure, given that those two animals could provide a decent profit incentive for the many smugglers who exploit this route. Like any black market industry, people will choose the method with the greatest margin at the lowest risk. Therefore, frustrating as enabling powers can be, I am pleased to see one in the Bill allowing for penalties to be looked at through regulations. We all know that you get a tougher sentence for smuggling cigarettes than for smuggling puppies.

The second point relates to the importing of pregnant dogs. In recent years there has been a change in approach as people have realised that smuggling a pregnant dog is a better way to reduce risk and maximise profits, given that the average litter is five to six puppies and with larger breeds having litters of up to 12. Since 2019, the Dogs Trust has taken in 177 pregnant dogs, which demonstrates the escalating nature of the trade. I should declare an interest, as one of those dogs gave birth to my own dog, a charcoal labrador called Tess.