To answer questions submitted by Opposition Group Leaders on items on the agenda.
Minutes:
Question from Councillor Thomas to Councillor Inglis.
“The addition of a limit to the number of dogs that can be walked at a time is welcomed but it is astonishing that the limit has been set at six dogs. This is a huge number to keep under control. The RSPCA recommends a limit of four. It is not just a question of fouling as the report suggests, it is also about safety. There have been incidents in our ward of dogs attacking people and other dogs. Plus there are recorded incidents of dogs attacking swans and destroying bird nests. A limit of four dogs all round would be more sensible, perhaps with a licensing process to allow up to six in special cases as is the case elsewhere. I note that three areas in West Bridgford have been given a limit of four dogs, rather than six. What criteria and consultation processes were used to ensure that all sites that would benefit from the tighter limit were included in the order?”
Councillor Inglis thanked Cllr Thomas and was pleased that she recognised the work undertaken to include a measure in the revised PSPO in relation to the maximum number of dogs that could be walked in public places. The figure of six was consistent with other local authorities that had similar PSPOs and it was also referenced as a maximum figure in the statutory guidance for dog day care establishments. The RSPCA suggested limit of four was only in relation to commercial dog walkers and clearly exceeded Government guidance for the same activities. It was also important to note that the PSPO applied to all public places, dogs and owners across the Borough, therefore it needed to be an appropriately balanced measure.
The draft PSPO with the six dog maximum element was widely consulted upon for a six-week period, which had given people the opportunity to suggest having a lower number. The Council’s Communities Manager had provided evidence in three locations for having a lower number and this change was then incorporated into the final draft, which would be presented at the meeting tonight. There would be an opportunity to review the effectiveness of the PSPO over the next three years and Councillor Thomas could then look to provide further evidence at this time. Councillor Inglis advised that there was no provision for the Council to introduce a licensing regime just for the number of dogs being walked.
Councillor Thomas asked a supplementary question.
“As far as safety is concerned, in terms of attacks on people and other dogs, dogs off lead are a particular concern, especially when multiple dogs are involved, and they act like a pack. We have residents who will no longer walk in Meadow Park in East Leake because of the terror they experience when dogs run up to them. Why is there only one dogs on lead area specified in Schedule One.”
Councillor Inglis stated that Schedule One had been approved three years ago as part of the PSPO, and was the only data for that period, nothing since then had come forward to suggest anything different and he was unaware of any attacks by packs of dogs. He hoped that the new PSPO would address the issue by limiting the number to six.
Question from Councillor J Walker to Councillor J Wheeler.
“With the incoming Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) changes and acknowledgment in the Strategy of the importance of communicating important issues with residents about LGR will Cabinet consider engaging with residents of West Bridgford about the inclusion of a Town Council as part of their Engagement Action Plan?”
Councillor Wheeler thanked Councillor Walker and confirmed that details of LGR had been communicated to residents, including details of the joint response from local councils, which had been submitted to the Government. The Council would continue to communicate with residents on any options and proposals received back from the Government.
Councillor Walker asked a supplementary question.
“How do you envision the democratic set up for West Bridgford after LGR.”
Councillor Wheeler stated that he could not respond to a hypothetical situation, further discussions would be taking place and any proposals, which came forward would be considered on merit.