{"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=1&q=animals&state=all","first":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?q=animals&state=all","last":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=12&q=animals&state=all","next":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=2&q=animals&state=all","prev":null},"data":[{"type":"petition","id":705384,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/705384.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban immediately the use of dogs in scientific and regulatory procedures","background":"As a first step to end animal testing, we want an immediate ban for dogs. They are commercially bred in what we see as bleak and inhumane factory-like conditions. We believe there is evidence suggesting that dogs are left being unattended for extended periods in a Government-licenced establishment. ","additional_details":"In 2023, 2,456 dogs were used in 3,749 scientific procedures, 734 were classified as causing severe or moderate harm. There were 2,593 procedures for regulatory purposes even though there is no UK legislation that mandates animal testing. These procedures can include oral gavage, when a tube is inserted into the dog's throat, up to 3 times a day, to administer liquids to the stomach. There are studies questioning the reliability and human-relevant value of the outcomes of these tests.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":257938,"created_at":"2024-11-27T11:31:12.874Z","updated_at":"2025-11-03T10:55:30.589Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-02-14T10:09:31.203Z","closed_at":"2025-08-14T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-27T12:08:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-16T20:59:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-03-05T13:30:55.930Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-18T12:22:00.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-04-28","debate_outcome_at":"2025-04-29T09:03:35.117Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-03-05","summary":"The government does not agree to the proposed immediate ban as international guidance still requires data from animal testing to ensure the safety of medicines and products before testing in humans.","details":"While the use of animals in science, including for human medicines, generates significant debate, the carefully regulated use of animals in scientific research remains necessary to protect humans, animal health and the wider environment. The Government therefore does not agree to immediately ban the use of dogs for testing and research purposes in the UK.\r\n\r\nThe manifesto committed the Government to partner with scientists, industry, and civil society as we work towards the phasing out of animal testing. This is a long-term goal, and it will need further scientific and technical advancement and validation to reach this point but we are determined to work towards it. Currently the use of animals remains important for understanding how biological systems work, in the development of safe new medicines, treatments and technologies, and in testing chemicals.\r\n \r\nOur current approach is to actively support and fund the development and dissemination of techniques that replace, reduce and refine the use of animals in research (the 3Rs), and to ensure that the UK continues to have a robust regulatory system for licensing animal studies and enforcing legal standards. The UK has a world leading reputation for the delivery of the 3Rs. UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) provides core funding for the National Centre for 3Rs (NC3Rs), which works nationally and internationally to drive the uptake of 3Rs technologies and ensure that advances in the 3Rs are reflected in policy, practice and regulations on animal research.\r\n \r\nThe use of animals in science is highly regulated, including a three-tier system of licensing which licenses each establishment, project and individual involved in performing regulated procedures involving animals. All establishments are required to have dedicated individuals, including veterinary surgeons with legal responsibilities for the care and welfare of animals, and an ethical review body, which reviews any proposals for the use of animals and promotes the 3Rs of animal use.\r\n\r\nThe UK Home Office regulator conducts an integrated assessment of the compliance of all licence holders including on-site inspections. The Government has published and enforces standards for the care and accommodation of all animals bred, supplied or used for scientific purposes.\r\n\r\nAlthough much research can be done without using animals, there are still purposes where use of live animals is essential, as the complexity of whole biological systems cannot be reliably replicated using validated alternative methodologies. Animal testing is therefore required by all global medicines regulators, including the UK’s Medicine and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). We are working with regulators to see how advances in technology can and will reduce use and phase out use in some areas.\r\n\r\nIt should be noted that the MHRA does not require all medicines to be tested on two species as some drugs lack their primary mode of action in animal species other than primates. However, most drugs do retain their activity in animal species and safety testing in a second species is therefore required for these drugs, with dogs being one of the species that can be used. Toxicity testing in dogs is limited in duration: in the UK and European Union, this period is 6 months. The MHRA does not itself use dogs in scientific procedures. The Government’s commitment to phasing out the use of animals is a clear goal; however, we expect the use of animals in science to adapt and reduce over time and be phased out for some purposes.\r\n \r\nThe Government will take steps to place the UK at the forefront of an alternative methods revolution and we believe that scientific advances make the prospects for change better than they have ever been. We are supporting and accelerating advances in biomedical science and technologies to reduce reliance on the use of animals in research and importantly to avoid some of the scientific limitations of animal models of human diseases. This includes stem cell research, cell culture systems that mimic the function of human organs, imaging and new computer modelling and AI techniques based on very large data sets. DSIT, Home Office and DEFRA Ministers have agreed to publish an alternative methods strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods and the phasing out of animal testing. We expect to publish this strategy later this year.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Science, Innovation and Technology ","created_at":"2025-03-05T13:30:55.921Z","updated_at":"2025-03-05T13:30:55.921Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-04-28","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-04-28/debates/3CC1C22D-4585-4A07-90EF-0FB55C37FC54/ScientificAndRegulatoryProceduresUseOfDogs","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/oQ3Vpixa_vU?si=F5j5fGjEPmx5NNtw&t=296","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0082/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"SIT","name":"Department for Science, Innovation and Technology","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-science-innovation-and-technology"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":732559,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/732559.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Limit the sale of fireworks to those running local council approved events only","background":"Ban the sale of fireworks to the general public to minimise the harm caused to vulnerable people and animals. Defenceless animals can die from the distress caused by fireworks.\r\n\r\nI believe that permitting unregulated use of fireworks is an act of wide-scale cruelty to animals.","additional_details":" \r\n \r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":195930,"created_at":"2025-07-06T14:27:42.186Z","updated_at":"2026-05-01T12:03:42.266Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-08-20T10:08:00.535Z","closed_at":"2026-02-20T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-06T20:30:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-03T18:36:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-18T12:56:17.287Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-09T20:23:40.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-19","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-20T15:23:55.089Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-18","summary":"The Government recognises the negative impact fireworks can have on some people and animals.  However, when used responsibly they are a source of enjoyment for many people. ","details":"The Government’s intention is to minimise the negative impact of fireworks and to support their considerate use, while reducing the risks and disturbances to individuals, animals, and property. The majority of individuals who use fireworks do so in a responsible and safe manner and there are enforcement mechanisms in place to tackle situations when fireworks are misused.\r\n\r\nAt this point in time the Government does not have any plans to ban the sale of fireworks to consumers. We have launched a fireworks campaign for this fireworks season to provide guidance on minimising the impacts of fireworks on animal welfare and encouraging responsible use. Lower noise fireworks are promoted in the campaign alongside encouraging people to consider going to a public display. Public displays are more likely to be well-publicised, providing people with an opportunity to prepare ahead of the display taking place. The campaign also includes new guidance for those running community fireworks events, and social media posts that emphasise the risks from the misuse of fireworks. This supplements existing guidance from Government and other organisations that is available to help people to use fireworks safely and appropriately. My safety: fireworks - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/my-safety-fireworks)\r\nOrganising non-professional fireworks displays - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/organising-non-professional-fireworks-displays)\r\n\r\nA regulatory framework currently controls the sale, availability, and use of fireworks to consumers. For example, there is an 11pm curfew in place for the use of fireworks, with later exceptions only for the traditional firework periods of November 5th, Diwali, New Year’s Eve and the Chinese New Year. Using fireworks outside the curfew hours is a criminal offence enforced by the police and can lead to imprisonment and a substantial fine.  There is also a maximum noise level of 120 decibels with many retailers also offering ‘lower noise’ and ‘no bang’ fireworks.\r\n\r\nA number of animal welfare organisations, along with industry and local authorities, provide advice and guidance to enable people to minimise the negative impacts of fireworks on people, animals and our communities. We work closely with these organisations to amplify this messaging in the run up to, and during, key dates when fireworks are commonly used.  \r\n\r\nTo inform any future action the Government will continue to engage with businesses, consumer groups and charities to gather evidence on the issues with and impacts of fireworks.  \r\n\r\nDepartment for Business and Trade","created_at":"2025-11-18T12:56:17.285Z","updated_at":"2025-11-18T12:57:00.440Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-19","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-19/debates/C0AE7A79-B8C1-4E33-8CB7-A9AAD98B62E6/SaleOfFireworks","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/G1ntVoBByDE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn05704/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/fireworks/index.html","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"BT","name":"Department for Business and Trade","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-and-trade"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":759783,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/759783.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make a public animal abuser register & automatically ban ownership","background":"Create a public register of all offenders convicted of animal abuse and introduce an automatic, lifetime ban on animal ownership for anyone convicted of animal neglect or abuse. This register should be searchable by vets, breeders, charities and the public to prevent repeat offending.","additional_details":"I clean homes for free for people in need and regularly witness animals suffering under owners with a history for animal neglect or abuse. Currently, bans are discretionary and there is no public register. Abusers can continue acquiring animals. A mandatory ban and register could prevent repeat cruelty and break cycles of harm. Additionally, an immediate automatic lifetime ban could prevent animal ownership being at a judge’s discretion.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":195275,"created_at":"2026-02-03T12:04:15.845Z","updated_at":"2026-05-09T13:44:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-03-12T17:01:57.173Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-03T12:51:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-02T17:17:30.000Z","government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-03T22:06:10.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Bea Elton","rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":738192,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/738192.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Reduce the maximum noise level for consumer fireworks from 120 to 90 decibels","background":"We think each year, individuals suffer because of loud fireworks. We believe horses, dogs, cats, livestock and wildlife can be terrified by noisy fireworks and many people find them intolerable.","additional_details":"There is independent research suggesting: \r\n\r\n• Over half of dog owners report fireworks-anxiety in their dog\r\n• There’s an 81% increase in missing dogs around Bonfire Night\r\n• Almost 25% of military veterans say fireworks have caused a negative experience for them\r\n\r\nWe think both humans and animals are less likely to be distressed by fireworks noise below 90dB. We believe lower noise levels would allow fireworks to be enjoyed while potentially reducing some of their many negative impacts.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":184376,"created_at":"2025-08-18T08:48:05.528Z","updated_at":"2026-03-26T11:00:29.806Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-04T13:29:13.913Z","closed_at":"2026-03-04T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-18T09:56:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-04T15:43:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-23T12:35:09.890Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-03T14:00:10.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-19","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-20T15:22:32.649Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-07","summary":"The Government recognises that some people have strong feelings about fireworks and has been listening to concerns raised by members of the public regarding the impact of firework noise.","details":"The Government's intention is to minimise the negative impact of fireworks and to support their considerate use, reducing the risks and disturbances to individuals, animals, and property.  Current regulations control their sale, availability, and use, including setting a maximum noise level of 120 decibels for consumer fireworks. Many retailers also offer ‘lower noise’ and ‘no bang’ fireworks which are available to purchase by consumers.\r\n\r\nFireworks, when used responsibly are a source of enjoyment for many people.  The Government recognises however the concerns raised by signatories to this petition regarding the potential impact fireworks can have on communities and animals.  \r\n\r\nThe Government is engaging with businesses, consumer groups and charities to better understand the issues with and impacts of fireworks. Noise is one of the key issues we are seeking views on. The Government is also considering the experience of other countries where lower noise limits are in place for consumer fireworks to understand the impact this has had and to identify best practice.\r\n \r\nFor this fireworks season, to ensure people continue to use fireworks in a safe and considerate manner, the Government has launched a fireworks campaign for this fireworks season to provide guidance on minimising the impacts of fireworks on animal welfare and encouraging responsible use. Lower noise fireworks are promoted in the campaign alongside considerate use.  This supplements existing guidance from Government and other organisations that is available to help people to use fireworks safely and appropriately.  The campaign also includes new guidance for those running community fireworks events, and social media posts that emphasise the risks from the misuse of fireworks.  \r\n\r\nMy safety: fireworks - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/my-safety-fireworks)\r\nOrganising non-professional fireworks displays - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/organising-non-professional-fireworks-displays)\r\n\r\nA number of animal welfare organisations, along with industry and local authorities, provide advice and guidance to enable people to minimise the negative impacts of fireworks on people, animals and our communities. We work closely with these organisations to amplify this messaging in the run up to, and during, key dates when fireworks are commonly used. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Business and Trade\r\n\r\nThis is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response towards the bottom of the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/738192)","created_at":"2025-10-23T12:35:09.887Z","updated_at":"2025-11-18T15:28:36.600Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-19","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-19/debates/C0AE7A79-B8C1-4E33-8CB7-A9AAD98B62E6/SaleOfFireworks","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/G1ntVoBByDE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn05704/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/fireworks/index.html","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":736578,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/736578.json"},"attributes":{"action":"End testing on dogs and other animals for development of products for human use","background":"Many tests on dogs and other animals cause unimaginable suffering. They can translate poorly into effective treatments and cures for human diseases or provide safety and efficacy data that is not relevant to humans.","additional_details":"Over 90% of drugs that appear safe and effective in animals do not go on to receive FDA, USA approval.\r\n \r\nIn 2023, 2,605,528 animals were used for the first time in scientific procedures incl. 2,477 dogs & 1,815 primates. Animals are bred & housed in bleak conditions and then used in tests that can cause immense physical and psychological suffering. We think government-led action is required to radically divert funding and evolve policy to implement the use of existing and the development of new Non-Animal Methodologies (NAMS). We believe the current testing paradigm is failing both animals and humans and is holding back medical advances.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":121854,"created_at":"2025-08-07T21:10:12.188Z","updated_at":"2026-05-01T16:18:00.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-10-31T10:22:59.264Z","closed_at":"2026-04-30T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-07T21:53:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-02T14:09:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-13T17:10:59.743Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-19T19:54:00.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-04-27","debate_outcome_at":"2026-04-29T09:09:44.258Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-13","summary":"The use of animals for development of products for human use remains necessary. The Government therefore does not agree to end testing on dogs and other animals for testing and research purposes.","details":"Our published Replacing Animals in Science strategy (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/replacing-animals-in-science-strategy) will accelerate the roll out of safe and effective alternatives to phase out animal testing in all but exceptional circumstances, delivering on our manifesto pledge to “partner with scientists, industry, and civil society as we work towards the phasing out of animal testing\". By streamlining the process for bringing alternatives forward, the Government will accelerate our transition away from animal use, while continuing to support crucial research and innovation.\r\n\r\nScientific advances make the prospects for change better than they have ever been, and we are supporting the acceleration of advances in biomedical science and technologies, to reduce reliance on the use of animals in research. This includes stem cell research, cell culture systems that mimic the function of human organs, imaging and new computer modelling and AI techniques based on very large data sets.\r\n\r\nThe strategy is backed by £75m of funding to accelerate safe and effective alternative methods, including £30m for the UK Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (UKCVAM) – a new centre to make the path to regulatory approval for new alternatives as straightforward as possible. It also includes £30m for a preclinical translational models hub – an institute that will bring together data, technology and expertise to promote collaboration between researchers.\r\n\r\nThe strategy includes a target that aims to use validated alternative methods to reduce the use of dogs and non-human primates in dedicated pharmacokinetic (PK) studies for human medicines by at least 35% by 2030. The strategy also sets a target to aim to use validated alternative methods to reduce the use of non-human primates and dogs in dedicated cardiovascular safety studies by at least 50% by 2030.\r\n\r\nThe strategy builds on our current approach, to actively support and fund the development and dissemination of techniques that replace, reduce and refine the use of animals in research (the 3Rs), and to ensure that the UK continues to have a robust regulatory system for licensing animal studies and enforcing legal standards. The UK has a world leading reputation for the delivery of the 3Rs. UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) provides core funding for the National Centre for 3Rs (NC3Rs), which works nationally and internationally to drive the uptake of 3Rs technologies and ensure that advances in the 3Rs are reflected in policy, practice and regulations on animal research.\r\n\r\nThe Government will continue to support the appropriate use of animals where reliable and effective alternatives are not yet available. Animal testing is required by all global medicines regulators, including the UK’s Medicine and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). However, we are determined to work with regulators and scientists as we move towards phasing out the use of animals. Enabling the properly regulated use of animals, while we move away from animal testing, is essential to improving the health and lives of humans and animals and to the safety and sustainability of our environment.\r\n\r\nThe argument claiming over 90% of drugs fail in human trials, despite being tested on animals, disregards drugs that are tested on animals and found not to be suitable for use in human clinical trials. Drugs fail for a variety of reasons and animals are used for safety screening as well as efficacy modelling. Moreover, not all types of drugs fail at the same rate. Many do better and success rates vary widely by treatment type.\r\n\r\nThe welfare of animals in science is ensured by the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act (ASPA, 1986) and enforced by the Animals in Science Regulation Unit (ASRU). The use of animals in science is highly regulated, including a three-tier system of licensing, which licenses each establishment, project and individual involved in performing regulated procedures involving animals. The UK Home Office regulator conducts an integrated assessment of the compliance of all licence holders, including on-site inspections. The Government has published and enforces standards for the care and accommodation of all animals bred, supplied or used for scientific purposes.\r\n\r\nASPA mandates the development and application of alternative methods, including non-animal methods, as part of implementation of the 3Rs (the Replacement, Reduction and Refinement of animals used in research). Under ASPA, research which uses animals is only conducted where there is no alternative available, using the fewest number of animals and procedures. Until full replacement of the use of animals in science is possible, the UK’s support of refinement approaches, led by the NC3Rs, works to reduce animal suffering as much as possible.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Science, Innovation & Technology ","created_at":"2025-11-13T17:10:59.741Z","updated_at":"2025-11-13T17:10:59.741Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-04-27","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-04-27/debates/E58B5F78-ACDD-4354-9FD6-CBAB8F3115C3/AnimalTesting","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/VemDcod-F3E?si=WTR6QKGy_Rsl2Zny&t=253","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10644/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"SIT","name":"Department for Science, Innovation and Technology","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-science-innovation-and-technology"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":718660,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/718660.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Introduce Licensing and Regulation for Dog and Cat Rescues to Protect Welfare\r\n","background":"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. ","additional_details":"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.  \r\n \r\nBy introducing clear legal requirements, the Government can safeguard animal welfare, protect public confidence in rescues, and prevent organizations from operating irresponsibly.  ","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":109647,"created_at":"2025-02-21T07:32:44.335Z","updated_at":"2026-03-18T16:55:27.633Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-08T14:27:32.559Z","closed_at":"2025-10-08T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-27T21:44:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-16T17:49:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-06-06T07:49:36.733Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-17T07:50:20.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-26","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-27T09:50:42.023Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-07-10","summary":"Animal rescue organisations must meet existing statutory welfare requirements. Moving forward, the Government is developing an animal welfare strategy and will outline more detail in due course.","details":"The Government appreciates the important work that responsible animal sanctuaries as well as rescue and rehoming organisations do, often on a voluntary basis, to ensure that animals taken into the care of these organisations are offered the opportunity of a forever home. \r\n\r\nThere are existing protections under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, whereby any person responsible for an animal, whether on a permanent or temporary basis, has a duty to ensure the welfare of the animals in their care. Companion animal rescue and rehoming organisations in England and Wales must therefore comply with statutory welfare requirements set out in the Animal Welfare Act 2006. Therefore, the Department encourages individuals to report any concerns regarding whether these standards are being met to the relevant local authority, which has powers to investigate.\r\n\r\nMembers of the public can also check if the rescue centre they use is a member of the Association of Dogs and Cats Homes, which has set clear standards for animal assessments, neutering and rehoming procedures that all members adhere to.\r\n\r\nMore broadly, the Department is developing an overarching approach to animal welfare and, as part of this, is actively considering the animal welfare protections in place in rescue and rehoming centres, including whether there is a need for additional guidance or regulation. The Department has also initiated a series of meetings with key animal welfare stakeholders as part of this wider work. We will be outlining more detail in due course.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs\r\n\r\nThis is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response towards the bottom of the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/718660)","created_at":"2025-06-06T07:49:36.731Z","updated_at":"2025-07-17T10:45:39.625Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-26","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-26/debates/D4C51DDC-9C32-4F43-B598-CB8C3C82B90F/AnimalRescueCentres","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuVIHqnrV5M","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2026-0013/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/licensing-regulation-animal-rescues/index.html","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":700557,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700557.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban non-stun slaughter in the UK","background":"In modern society, we believe more consideration needs to be given to animal welfare and how livestock is treated and culled.\r\n\r\nWe believe non-stun slaughter is barbaric and doesn't fit in with our culture and modern-day values and should be banned, as some EU nations have done.","additional_details":"In a landmark case, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that a ban on the ritual slaughter of animals without prior stunning does not violate the ECHR.\r\n\r\nThe Court considered that the protection of public morals, to which Article 9 of the Convention referred was not indifferent to the living environment of individuals covered by its protection and including animals.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":109018,"created_at":"2024-11-03T11:50:06.631Z","updated_at":"2026-04-27T10:00:26.164Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-11-21T13:57:34.071Z","closed_at":"2025-05-21T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-04T16:51:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2024-12-08T09:11:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-01-10T14:30:23.976Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-04T15:32:00.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-06-09","debate_outcome_at":"2025-06-10T09:10:01.540Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-01-10","summary":"The Government would prefer all animals to be stunned before slaughter. However, we respect the rights of Jews and Muslims to eat meat prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs.","details":"The Government encourages the highest standards of animal welfare at slaughter and would prefer all animals to be stunned before slaughter, but it respects the rights of Jews and Muslims to eat meat prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs.\r\n\r\nThe ‘Demonstration of Life Protocol’, an industry-led initiative supported by the Government, provides assurance for Muslim consumers that stunning is compatible with halal slaughter requirements, while protecting the welfare of the animals involved. Therefore, a significant proportion of halal meat comes from animals that are stunned before slaughter.\r\n\r\nLegislation sets out the main requirements to protect the welfare of animals at slaughter. There are additional rules that apply when animals are slaughtered without stunning to ensure that animals are spared avoidable pain, suffering, or distress during the slaughter process. Official Veterinarians of the Food Standards Agency are present in all approved slaughterhouses to monitor and enforce these animal welfare requirements.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2025-01-10T14:30:23.972Z","updated_at":"2025-01-10T14:30:23.972Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-06-09","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-06-09/debates/27E94862-93C7-4D29-B0DA-F77F92D14161/Non-StunSlaughterOfAnimals","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/R7Anv9XBSPE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0117/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":706302,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/706302.json"},"attributes":{"action":"End the use of cages and crates for all farmed animals","background":"We think the UK Government must ban all cages for laying hens as soon as possible.\r\n\r\nWe think it should also ban the use of all cage and crates for all farmed animals including:\r\n• farrowing crates for sows\r\n• individual calf pens\r\n• cages for other birds, including partridges, pheasants and quail","additional_details":"Every year in the UK, millions of farmed animals experience huge suffering confined in cages. From millions of laying hens unable to express their natural behaviours to mother pigs nursing their piglets confined in narrow crates, to calves, quail and game birds.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":108277,"created_at":"2024-11-29T09:07:55.158Z","updated_at":"2026-02-18T10:24:31.362Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-01-24T11:23:12.221Z","closed_at":"2025-07-24T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-29T13:23:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-01-24T15:42:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-02-19T14:01:14.825Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-04-22T16:05:40.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-06-16","debate_outcome_at":"2025-06-17T14:25:14.913Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-02-17","summary":"This Government was elected on a mandate to introduce the most ambitious plans to improve animal welfare in a generation. The use of cages and crates is an issue we are now considering very carefully.","details":"The Government is aware of the strong public feeling on keeping farm animals in cages and the recent campaigns urging the Government to publish consultations on phasing out the use of enriched ‘colony’ cages for laying hens and farrowing crates for pigs. The use of cages and other close confinement systems for farmed animals is an issue we are currently considering very carefully. \r\n\r\nFor laying hens, we are encouraged that the sector is moving away from the use of enriched ‘colony’ cages to free-range and barn production. The transition to cage free systems is being supported by this Government through grants for laying hen and pullet farmers in England with flocks of 1,000 birds or more, to refurbish or replace existing housing including those looking to make the transition from colony cages to high-welfare non-cage systems.\r\n\r\nThis transition has also been supported by the major supermarkets - who have pledged to stop selling shell eggs from hens kept in colony cages by the end of 2025 - with some retailers also extending their 2025 pledge to processed egg, such as powdered or liquid. This shift by retailers has accelerated the move away from colony cage systems. Eggs produced from hens in colony cage systems accounted for just over 44% of the total egg throughput in the UK in 2018, but by the end of 2024, this had reduced to 20%. Free-range eggs now account for 69% of the total egg throughput in the UK. \r\n\r\nWe already have a significant outdoor pig sector: 50% of the national sow breeding herd give birth freely on outdoor units, with no option for confinement. The statutory Welfare Code of Practice for Pigs states that the aim is for farrowing crates to no longer be necessary and for any new system to protect the welfare of the sow, as well as her piglets - (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/pigs-on-farm-welfare).  \r\n\r\nAs with cages for laying hens, ending the use of farrowing crates is an issue that not only affects the UK industry, but is also something that our European trading partners are also considering and, as with any change to our farming systems, we need to carefully consider the implications for trade. When considering changes to welfare standards at home, it is crucial that we consider the potential for simply moving low-welfare production overseas. Replacing a UK egg with an imported caged egg would be bad for the consumer, bad for producers, and bad for animal welfare.\r\n\r\nThe Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) Regulations 2007, Schedule 6, Paragraph 1, sets down requirements that apply to the accommodation of calves confined for rearing and fattening. It states that: “No calf may be confined in an individual stall or pen after the age of eight weeks unless a veterinary surgeon certifies that its health or behaviour requires it to be isolated in order to receive treatment”. In addition, the regulation requires the hutches to be of a specified size and individual stalls or pens (except for those isolating sick animals) must have perforated walls which allow calves to have direct visual and tactile contact with other calves. \r\n\r\nWe are pleased that the industry has already been moving towards pair housing of young calves and some farm assurance schemes require calves to be housed in groups or pairs from less than 8 weeks of age.\r\n\r\nDefra’s Code of Practice for the Welfare of Gamebirds Reared for Sporting Purposes provides keepers with guidance on how to meet the welfare needs of their gamebirds as required by the Animal Welfare Act 2006 - (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/code-of-practice-for-the-welfare-of-gamebirds-reared-for-sporting-purposes). It recommends that barren cages for breeding pheasants and small barren cages for breeding partridges should not be used, and that any system should be appropriately enriched.  \r\n\r\nThe UK is rightly proud of the high animal welfare standards that underpin our high-quality British produce, and we will work to ensure we address low confidence and provide stability for the farming sector, while delivering high standards of farm animal welfare. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2025-02-19T14:01:14.820Z","updated_at":"2025-02-19T14:06:16.895Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-06-16","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-06-16/debates/6FFB5159-BC54-4321-BDC5-CB64FF9BF2E2/FarmedAnimalsCagesAndCrates","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q29dXKFMozo","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0121/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":700013,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700013.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Limit the sale and use of Fireworks to licence holders only","background":"Fireworks killed our mum, Josephine Smith.\r\nHer home was attacked using fireworks. We believe the use of fireworks after sale to the public cannot be policed.\r\nWe think all displays should be licensed and sales limited to licence holders only.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n","additional_details":"Improved regulations on the sale and use of fireworks are backed by a wide range of MPs, charities and organisations and has huge public support.\r\n\r\nThe distress and trauma caused is very well known to the medical profession, emergency services, human and animal welfare groups AND the Government.\r\n\r\nWE are asking the new government not to ignore the problem. It’s time to put the welfare of the vulnerable first.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":87527,"created_at":"2024-10-30T15:10:03.188Z","updated_at":"2025-12-10T09:11:23.278Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-11-05T13:26:05.473Z","closed_at":"2025-05-05T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-10-30T15:14:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-06T18:16:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2024-12-09T10:43:51.883Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":"2024-12-09","debate_outcome_at":"2024-12-10T12:45:09.379Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2024-12-09","summary":"Most people use fireworks in a responsible and safe manner, with laws in place to address misuse. The Government intends to engage with stakeholders to gather evidence on the impact of fireworks.","details":"The Government takes the misuse of fireworks issues seriously. Where local issues are identified, councils and the police have powers to protect the public from misuse and harm. Misuse of fireworks and illegal possession offenses are subject to an unlimited fine and/or six months in prison.\r\n\r\nTackling Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) is a top priority for this Government, and a key part of our Safer Streets Mission.  We understand that anti-social behaviour causes great harm and misery to our communities, and, if left unchecked, can lead to more serious offending.   \r\nThe police, local authorities and other local agencies have a range of flexible tools and powers that they can use to respond to ASB through the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.   It is for local areas to decide how best to deploy these powers depending on the specific circumstances. They are best placed to understand what is driving the behaviour in question, the impact that it is having, and to determine the most appropriate response.  \r\nThe Government is examining the detail of existing positions to decide if and where policy changes may be needed.  The safety of the public and the impact on people, animals and property will be central in decisions on how we proceed in relation to the regulation of fireworks. \r\n\r\nTo inform any future decisions the Government intends to engage with businesses, consumer groups and charities shortly after fireworks season to gather evidence on the issues with and impacts of fireworks.\r\nWhile we consider the potential of future regulatory changes, there are steps we can take now to ensure people are able to enjoy fireworks responsibly. To ensure people use fireworks in a safe and considerate manner the Government launched a launch a fireworks campaign for the fireworks season to provide guidance on minimising the impacts of fireworks on animal welfare and encouraging responsible use.  This supplements existing guidance from Government and other organisations that is available to help people to use fireworks safely and appropriately.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Business and Trade  \r\n\r\n\r\n","created_at":"2024-12-09T10:43:51.880Z","updated_at":"2024-12-09T10:43:51.880Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-12-09","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-12-09/debates/CCC2EF11-D537-40A7-9D1F-3451071819B5/details","video_url":"https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/8dd62bdb-8421-47f7-9db6-efd1f5c07fde","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2024-0152/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"BT","name":"Department for Business and Trade","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-and-trade"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":729597,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/729597.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make it an offence for a person's dog to kill another pet and prosecute owners","background":"We want the government to make it an offence for an person's dog to kill another pet and prosecute owners if this happens. We think that owners must be held accountable and face consequences if their pet kills another pet. ","additional_details":"We believe such measures could protect other pets and cultivate a responsible pet ownership culture. We feel that strengthening legal requirements could ensure a safer environment for pets and people. Let us take a stand to protect our family pets and prevent the heartache of losing a beloved animal due to the negligence of others. We think that immediate legislative action is required to prevent further tragedies.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":61701,"created_at":"2025-06-06T10:52:50.508Z","updated_at":"2026-01-03T00:00:16.399Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-02T08:12:50.205Z","closed_at":"2026-01-02T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-06T11:01:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-15T07:23:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-09-01T13:48:47.169Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-09-01","summary":"The police and local authorities already have a range of powers available to tackle dangerous dogs and irresponsible dog ownership, including in instances where a dog attacks another animal.","details":"The government recognises that dog attacks can have horrific consequences, and it takes this issue very seriously. The police and local authorities already have a range of powers available to tackle dangerous dogs and irresponsible dog ownership, including in instances where a dog attacks another animal, including pets.\r\n\r\nIt is an offence under section 3 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 (DDA) for the owner, or another person in charge of a dog, to cause or permit the dog to be dangerously out of control in any place. A dog may be considered dangerously out of control if it injures a person or an animal, or it causes a person to fear that it may injure them or their pet, and the person in charge of the dog has no proper control of it. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) will assess whether to proceed with a prosecution under section 3 of the DDA on a case-by-case basis. The CPS guidance can be found, here: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/dangerous-dog-offences. \r\n\r\nThe maximum penalty for such an offence is fourteen years’ imprisonment if it results in the death of a person; five years in the case of injury; three years if it is an attack on an assistance dog and six months where no injury is caused to a person. \r\nSection 2 of the Dogs Act 1871 allows a complaint to be made to a Magistrates’ Court where a dog is “dangerous and not kept under proper control”. The court may make any Order it considers appropriate to require the owner to keep the dog under proper control.\r\n\r\nUnder the Anti-Social Behaviour Crime and Policing Act 2014 the police and local authorities can issue community protection notices (CPNs) to address anti-social behaviour involving dogs. A CPN could require the owner of a dog to start doing certain things to reduce the impact of the dog’s behaviour on the community, such as keeping the dog on a lead when in public or attending dog training. Under this legislation, enforcement authorities also have powers to make Public Space Protection Orders, which may be used by enforcers to require dogs to be kept on leads in certain areas or restrict the number of dogs that can be walked by one person at any one time, for example.\r\n\r\nThe government is working with the police, local authorities and animal welfare groups to help prevent further dog attacks by encouraging responsible dog ownership, making sure dog control issues are addressed before they escalate, and using the full force of the law where needed. As part of this work, the government has reconvened the Responsible Dog Ownership Taskforce to explore measures to promote responsible dog ownership across all breeds of dog. \r\n\r\nThe government will continue to do its utmost to reduce the risk to people and animals from dangerous dogs and to prevent any more tragedies.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs\r\n","created_at":"2025-09-01T13:48:47.167Z","updated_at":"2025-09-01T13:52:53.482Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":724795,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/724795.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Protect hares and their young from shooting during the breeding season","background":"We call on the Government to stop the shooting of hares during their peak breeding season, by establishing a legally enforceable close season for hares in England and Wales, from 1st February to 30th September.","additional_details":"Hares are the only game species in England and Wales that can be shot all year round. It has been reported that the UK brown hare population could have fallen by more than 80% in the past 100 years. Shooting hares in the breeding season leaves dependent young to starve to death. Scotland introduced a close season over a decade ago. Many European countries already protect hares this way. We believe the Government must act now: for animal welfare and for biodiversity.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":56427,"created_at":"2025-04-09T16:04:09.612Z","updated_at":"2025-10-30T16:31:20.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-29T10:29:40.413Z","closed_at":"2025-10-29T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-04-09T20:12:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-08T08:07:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-05-28T09:49:51.106Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-05-27","summary":"The policy of a close season for hares in England remains under consideration as part of the Government’s plans to introduce the most ambitious programme for animal welfare in a generation. ","details":"The Government considers the need for a close season for hares is justified more by animal welfare concerns than biodiversity and species conservation. In short, a close season should reduce the number of adult hares being shot in the breeding season, which runs from February to October, meaning that fewer leverets (infant hares) are left motherless and vulnerable to starvation and predation. A close season is also consistent with Natural England's advice on wildlife management that controlling species in their peak breeding season should be avoided unless genuinely essential and unavoidable. The Government’s understanding is that most hare shooting occurs in February when the gamebird season ends, despite many adult female hares being pregnant or even already nursing their young. \r\n\r\nWhile viewing species conservation as a secondary concern in this instance, the Government is aware of evidence (e.g. Butterworth et al, 2017) that suggests a close season for hares would provide capacity for their population growth and result in markedly reduced numbers of dependent young being orphaned. The Government also recognises that other factors, such as habitat protection, levels of predation, and poor weather can have significant impacts on hare numbers.  The brown hare is one of the indicator species for our legally binding targets in England to halt the decline in species abundance by 2030 and then reverse declines by 2042. An estimated 80 percent reduction in the brown hare’s population in England and Wales over the last 100 years is clearly a cause for concern. \r\n\r\nDEFRA Ministers therefore support the ambition to introduce a close season for hares in England. The hare is a much-loved species and we fail to give it the protection we should. England and Wales stand out as being among the few European countries not to have a close season for their hares.  \r\nHowever, the Government requires a suitable primary legislative vehicle to deliver this close season. There is not one currently in place, but DEFRA will continue to look for suitable opportunities to take this measure forward. \r\n\r\nWildlife management is a devolved matter, and the response provided therefore relates to England only with the potential for relevant policy to extend and apply to Wales. \r\n\r\n- Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2025-05-28T09:49:51.101Z","updated_at":"2025-05-28T09:52:52.425Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":731016,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/731016.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban greyhound racing","background":"Greyhound racing kills and injures dogs. From 2017–2023, 1,230 dogs died trackside, many more were destroyed, and there were over 31,000 injuries. We believe it’s time to follow Wales and ban this cruel sport.","additional_details":"The industry breeds more dogs than are needed for racing - approximately 15,000-20,000 dogs are bred in Ireland each year, and some are also bred in Britain. We are concerned that dogs live in poor kennel conditions, and overbreeding creates a surplus, overwhelming rescue centres.\r\n \r\nA 2019 RTÉ documentary estimated up to 6,000 greyhounds are killed annually for not being fast enough. There are concerns about greyhounds being exported to countries with poor welfare laws.\r\n \r\nWe believe no animal should suffer for sport or entertainment. ","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":55580,"created_at":"2025-06-20T14:34:28.151Z","updated_at":"2026-01-31T18:34:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-30T08:54:11.284Z","closed_at":"2026-01-30T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-20T14:52:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-05T10:10:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-30T09:44:15.062Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-30","summary":"The government has no plans to ban greyhound racing. The government considers it a well-regulated sport and recognises the contribution it makes to many people’s lives as well as to the economy.","details":"The government has no plans to ban greyhound racing. While the government recognises the concerns some people have about greyhound racing, there is legislation in place to protect the welfare of racing greyhounds in England and a regulatory body – the Greyhound Board of Great Britain (GBGB) – that has made many improvements to greyhound welfare.   \r\n\r\nThe government also recognises the important contribution greyhound racing makes to the country’s cultural life and its rural economy, providing some 5400 jobs across Great Britain as well as being the sixth most popular sport in terms of viewership.  \r\n\r\nThe welfare of racing greyhounds in England is covered by the Animal Welfare Act 2006 and the Welfare of Racing Greyhounds Regulations 2010. The 2006 Act allows action to be taken where there is evidence of cruelty to an animal or a failure to provide for an animal’s welfare needs. This includes where greyhounds are raced at tracks or kept at trainers’ kennels. Further to these general provisions, welfare standards at all English greyhound tracks are set by the 2010 Regulations.\r\n\r\nThe 2010 Regulations include the requirement that all tracks must have a vet present while dogs are running, who must inspect each greyhound intended to run in every race, trial, or sales trial to ensure that the greyhound is fit to run. Temperature-controlled kennelling must also be provided at the track, and all racing greyhounds must be permanently identified. Tracks must also keep records of any injuries sustained to greyhounds while at the track. \r\n\r\nStandards in the 2010 Regulations can be enforced either by the local authority or by GBGB. GBGB’s ability to regulate track standards in the 2010 Regulations is allowed for in law because they are accredited by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS). UKAS is the UK’s National Accreditation Body, recognised by the government as the sole UK organisation for the accreditation of certification and inspection bodies. UKAS provides independent, external oversight of GBGB’s performance as a regulator of track standards.  \r\n\r\nIn addition, GBGB has also introduced several welcome welfare initiatives. In collaboration with animal welfare groups, the GBGB has developed a set of detailed welfare standards for trainers’ kennels, which are then verified at trainers’ kennels by independent auditors, with this process also accredited by UKAS. On average, GBGB licensed kennels will be inspected three times a year by GBGB staff, as well as by a vet and an independent inspector.  \r\n\r\nThe GBGB has also introduced a Greyhound Retirement Scheme to contribute towards rehoming costs; as well as an Injury Recovery Scheme to provide financial support to trainers to treat career-ending injuries to greyhounds, where otherwise they might be put to sleep.   \r\n\r\nIn 2022, the GBGB published its long term, national welfare strategy: ‘A Good Life for Every Greyhound’ (https://www.gbgb.org.uk/welfare-care/commitment-to-care/). The strategy focuses not only on further reducing risks of injury but also developing and implementing new management practices to improve the welfare of greyhounds throughout their lives, including after racing.  \r\n\r\nSince 2018 GBGB have published yearly, independently audited injury, fatality and retirement figures. The overall, long-term trend for injuries and fatalities for racing greyhounds since 2018 has shown significant improvements. For example: the total number of GBGB registered greyhounds reported to have died has declined from 1013 deaths in 2017, to 386 in 2024; and the total number of greyhounds put to sleep due to the costs of treating injuries has fallen from 333 in 2017, to 3 in 2024.\r\n\r\nGiven the work being undertaken to improve greyhound welfare, and the protections in place, the government does not believe it is necessary to ban greyhound racing. However, the government will continue to monitor GBGB’s progress and, should further measures and protections be required, the government will consider options that are targeted, effective, and proportionate. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs","created_at":"2025-10-30T09:44:15.059Z","updated_at":"2025-10-30T09:45:10.094Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DCMS","name":"Department for Culture, Media and Sport","url":""}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":740004,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/740004.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Label ALL meat as Religiously Slaughtered or Non-Religiously Slaughtered","background":"We want the Government to create a law requiring all meat to have a label, such as a simple RS (Religiously Slaughtered) or NRS (Not religiously slaughtered), that states whether it has been religiously slaughtered or not.","additional_details":"We think that labelling meat as ‘stunned’ or ‘not stunned’ is not adequate because when meat has been subject to a ‘recoverable stun’, the throat is slit and the animal may wake up in excruciating pain to hear the religious blessing, unable to vocalise its distress.\r\n\r\nI am concerned that religiously slaughtered meat, using inhumane methods, is entering the food chain and is being sold to people who may object to the method of slaughter, without it being labelled.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":52272,"created_at":"2025-09-03T16:39:43.630Z","updated_at":"2026-03-30T13:06:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-29T12:40:14.512Z","closed_at":"2026-03-29T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-03T19:40:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-04T15:39:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-01-07T15:44:23.587Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-01-07","summary":"There are no requirements to label meat from animals slaughtered in accordance with religious rites. Where information of this nature is provided it must be accurate and must not be misleading.","details":"The government encourages the highest standards of animal welfare at slaughter and would prefer all animals to be stunned before slaughter, but respects the rights of Jews and Muslims to eat meat prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs. \r\n\r\nThe first national legislative requirement for stunning before slaughter in England and Wales was the Slaughter of Animals Act 1933. The Act also introduced an exception from the requirement to stun when animals are slaughtered in accordance with religious rites, for the food of Muslims and Jews. A significant proportion of halal meat comes from animals that are stunned before slaughter.\r\n\r\nThere are detailed protections in legislation to ensure that animals are spared any avoidable pain, distress or suffering when being slaughtered. Animals are stunned to make them unconscious and insensible to pain and slaughtermen are required to check that animals do not present any signs of consciousness in the period between being stunned and death.\r\n\r\nOfficial Veterinarians of the Food Standards Agency (FSA) are present in all approved slaughterhouses to monitor and enforce animal welfare requirements. When the FSA identifies breaches, they are fully investigated, and appropriate and proportionate action is taken to protect animal welfare.\r\n\r\nThere are no regulations that require the labelling of meat from animals slaughtered in accordance with religious rites. However, where any information of this nature is provided it must be accurate and must not be misleading to the consumer. It is for religious authorities to decide if meat is halal or kosher. The Government has no plans to introduce requirements for meat to be labelled according to whether it comes from an animal which has been slaughtered in accordance with religious rites.\r\n\r\nOn food labelling more generally, we recognise that while most consumers care about how their food is produced, the lack of consistency in food labelling makes it difficult for consumers to understand the animal welfare standards of their food and make informed purchasing decisions.\r\n\r\nAs set out in the Government’s animal welfare strategy, we are committed to ensuring that consumers have access to clear information on how their food was produced. To support this, we will continue working with relevant stakeholders, including the farming and food industry, scientists and NGOs to explore how improved animal welfare food labelling could provide greater consumer transparency, support farmers and promote better animal welfare.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs ","created_at":"2026-01-07T15:44:23.582Z","updated_at":"2026-01-07T15:44:23.582Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":744237,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/744237.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make it an offence to carry a catapult in public without lawful defence","background":"Change the law so catapult possession in public is an offence. Currently, police must prove intent or use to cause harm. We propose it becomes an absolute offence, like air rifles, without lawful defence. Rising attacks on people, animals, and wildlife show stronger powers are needed.","additional_details":"Catapults are increasingly linked to assaults, criminal damage, and rising wildlife attacks. Making public possession an absolute offence like air rifles with age checks, and a licensing scheme for legitimate uses like angling, would give police stronger powers.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":41238,"created_at":"2025-09-29T11:28:19.203Z","updated_at":"2026-04-23T23:00:00.278Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-10-23T14:17:08.000Z","closed_at":"2026-04-23T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-29T12:53:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-27T18:35:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-12-16T15:52:10.202Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-16","summary":"There are laws that can already be used against individuals who use catapults as a weapon, but the Government understands the concerns and is actively looking at this issue.","details":"The Government shares the concerns raised by the petitioners over the misuse of catapults, whether against people, property or wildlife.\r\n\r\nThere are a wide range of laws in place to punish those who misuse catapults. For example, under the Prevention of Crime Act 1953, if a person carries an offensive weapon in a public place or threatens a person with an offensive weapon, they may face up to 4 years in prison. An offensive weapon is defined as any article made or adapted for use for causing injury to the person or intended by the person having it with him for such use by him or by another person. The definition may include a catapult depending on the circumstances and facts of the case. \r\n\r\nWhere a catapult is used to harm a person, under the Offences against the Person Act 1861, it could be charged as assault occasioning actual bodily harm which carries a maximum penalty of 5 years’ imprisonment, However, depending on the gravity of the attack and the seriousness of the injury caused by the catapult, the offence of wounding or causing grievous bodily harm with intent could be committed, which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. \r\n\r\nUnder the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996, the police have powers to deal with offences concerning deliberate attempts to kill, injure or inflict harm on wildlife, and this would include cases where catapults have been used. It is also an offence under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to cause an animal any unnecessary suffering. The Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Act 2021 increases the sentences available to our courts for the most serious cases of animal cruelty to, for example, pets and livestock by increasing the maximum penalty for this offence to 5 years’ imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine.\r\n\r\nThe Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 also provides the police, local authorities and other local agencies with a range of tools and powers that they can use to respond to anti-social behaviour including that involving catapults. This includes Community Protection Warnings and Notices (CPWs and CPNs), and Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPOs) which can be used to prevent behaviour that is having, or likely to have, a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality. Through the Crime and Policing Bill we will also ensure that the police, local authorities, and other agencies have the tools and powers they need to deal with persistent anti-social behaviour and crime that is plaguing our communities. This includes increasing the maximum penalty for breach of a CPN or PSPO from £100 to £500, and the introduction of Respect Orders. Respect Orders will enable courts to ban adult offenders from engaging in harmful anti-social behaviours. This could, for example, see offenders banned from entering certain public places, where they have been behaving anti-socially.  \r\n\r\nThis Government is focussed on putting neighbourhood policing at the heart of plans to reform policing, to both enforce existing laws and those that this Government is bringing forward. The Government has committed to delivering an additional 13,000 police officers, PCSOs and special constables in neighbourhood policing roles by the end of this Parliament and made £200 million available this year to support the first steps towards delivering this significant boost to neighbourhood policing.  \r\n\r\nThe Home Office is providing funding this financial year for the National Rural Crime Unit as well as continuing its funding for the National Wildlife Crime Unit. This will help the units tackle those crimes that predominantly affect our rural communities.\r\n\r\nThere are a range of offences and powers that can therefore be used to prevent the misuse of catapults, but the Government is aware of continuing concerns about the problems caused by catapults. We are actively considering what more might be done, especially around enforcement. \r\n\r\nWe do not intend to accept the petitioners’ proposal at this time. However, public safety is a Government priority, and in view of the continuing concerns, we are actively looking at what more can be done to address the misuse of catapults.\r\n\r\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-12-16T15:52:10.199Z","updated_at":"2025-12-16T15:52:10.199Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":762116,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/762116.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban non-stun & recoverable stun slaughter of animals","background":"Religious slaughter may require the animal to be slaughtered whilst alive, which is in line with their religious beliefs. In relation to this, stunning needs to be recoverable. Normal slaughter uses a bolt gun that renders the animal brain dead and unable to regain consciousness.","additional_details":"The Government has the power to ban non-stun religious slaughter in this country via legislation. Greece did this in 2021. Many argue that the labelling of meat products via supermarkets is insufficient and can’t be trusted, so we believe a blanket ban on non-stun and recoverable stun animal slaughter is needed. We feel people who disagree with these practices shouldn’t effectively have their rights diminished and shouldn’t be forced to eat meat that has not been stunned-to-kill, due to a lack of options.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":34147,"created_at":"2026-02-22T09:22:07.864Z","updated_at":"2026-05-09T13:44:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-03-30T09:42:41.248Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-22T09:35:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-19T23:18:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-05-06T14:55:21.216Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Philip Weston","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-05-06","summary":"The government prefers all animals to be stunned before slaughter but respects the rights of Jews and Muslims to eat meat prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs.","details":"The government encourages the highest standards of animal welfare at slaughter and would prefer all animals to be stunned before slaughter. However, we respect the rights of Jews and Muslims to eat meat prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs. The government therefore has no plans to ban slaughter without stunning.\r\n\r\nThe key pieces of legislation which cover matters relating to the handling, stunning and slaughter of different species and other relevant operations are The Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing (England) Regulations 2015 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/1782/contents\r\n\r\nand assimilated law Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 on the protection of animals at the time of killing\r\nhttps://www.legislation.gov.uk/eur/2009/1099/introduction\r\n\r\nThe legislation sets out the permitted stunning methods for different species. Some of these, such as controlled atmospheric stunning, will kill the animal, and others, such as certain forms of electrical stunning, will make the animal unconscious (a “simple stun”). A simple stun must be followed as quickly as possible by a killing method, such as bleeding or pithing. \r\n\r\nBoth general slaughter and slaughter by the halal method use simple stunning methods. Annex D of the 2024 Slaughter Sector Survey\r\nhttps://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/67c5cf0e750837d7604dbdbf/25-02-14_Slaughter_Sector_Survey_2024__REVISED_.pdf \r\nsets out further details of the slaughter methods used during the relevant survey period and shows that, for example, the majority of sheep are electrically stunned whereas cattle are mainly killed by a captive bolt. \r\n\r\nFor all stunned slaughter, legislation requires checks to be made that animals do not present any signs of consciousness and sensibility between stunning and death. If animals are not properly stunned, appropriate measures such as a back-up stun must be taken.\r\n\r\nWhile there is an exception from stunning for meat for Jews and Muslims, a significant proportion of halal meat comes from animals that are stunned before slaughter. The 2024 Slaughter Sector Survey showed for example that 88% of halal meat chickens in England and Wales were stunned prior to slaughter during the survey week. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs\r\n","created_at":"2026-05-06T14:55:21.211Z","updated_at":"2026-05-06T14:57:00.906Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":729708,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/729708.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban the non-stun slaughter of animals","background":"Ban non-stun slaughter. We think it is cruel and causes unnecessary harm to the animals being slaughtered/butchered.","additional_details":"","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":31900,"created_at":"2025-06-07T15:40:06.420Z","updated_at":"2026-03-02T22:05:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-01T12:37:21.021Z","closed_at":"2026-03-01T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-08T14:03:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-27T13:22:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-02-10T17:01:55.758Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-02-10","summary":"The government prefers all animals to be stunned before slaughter. The law established in 1933 respects the rights of Jews and Muslims to eat meat prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs.","details":"The government encourages the highest standards of animal welfare at slaughter and would prefer all animals to be stunned before slaughter. However, we respect the rights of Jews and Muslims to eat meat prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs. The government, therefore, has no plans to ban slaughter without stunning.\r\n\r\nThe first national legislative requirement for stunning before slaughter in England and Wales was the Slaughter of Animals Act 1933. The Act also introduced an exception from the requirement to stun when animals are slaughtered in accordance with religious rites, for the food of Muslims and Jews.\r\n\r\nOver the years, the rules governing religious slaughter have developed to provide additional protection to animals slaughtered without stunning. These rules ensure that animals are spared avoidable pain, suffering or distress during the slaughter process. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs ","created_at":"2026-02-10T17:01:55.756Z","updated_at":"2026-02-10T17:01:55.756Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":746353,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/746353.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Allow charities to rescue dogs with docked tails under the Animal Welfare Bill","background":"We ask Parliament to include an exemption in the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill for registered charities and approved, responsible rescue organisations to rehome adult, disease tested dogs, who were previously docked as working hunting dogs abroad.","additional_details":"Without an exemption, we can no longer rescue Italian Spinoni, and organisations cannot help many other working breeds like pointers, spaniels and griffons.\r\n \r\nThese dogs have sadly lost their tails, docked for working purposes, not fashion, and are often treated abroad as disposable hunting tools. We support this Bill and ask to help improve it in crafting legislation that protects welfare while preventing loopholes. Please involve us, and let us continue to help these dogs.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":23237,"created_at":"2025-10-10T09:56:09.952Z","updated_at":"2026-05-09T13:39:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-11-17T14:33:36.068Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-10T11:35:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-07T20:05:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-01-06T14:15:01.899Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Sarah-Jane Newton","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-01-06","summary":"We will work with stakeholders to consider appropriate exemptions as we deliver the relevant regulations. Exemptions will need to be finely balanced against the risk of creating loopholes.","details":"As outlined in our manifesto, the government is committed to ending puppy smuggling. That is why we were pleased to support the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Act 2025.\r\n\r\nThe Act will close loopholes in the non-commercial pet travel rules that are abused by unscrupulous traders. It also gives the government powers to prevent the supply of low-welfare pets to the United Kingdom. This includes the power to make regulations prohibiting dogs and cats being brought into Great Britain with non-exempted mutilations, such as docked tails and cropped ears, and the power to specify appropriate exemptions in future regulations. \r\n\r\nThese prohibitions and any appropriate exemptions will be delivered via secondary legislation at a later date. We will continue to work with stakeholders and consider their feedback – for example, on the impact of the regulations on rescue and rehoming – to help shape these exemptions. The government is clear, however, that any exemptions to these measures will need to be finely balanced against the risk of creating loopholes that could be exploited by bad actors.\r\n\r\nIn the meantime, owners and importers can find up to date guidance on bringing dogs to Great Britain on the gov.uk website, available at: https://www.gov.uk/bring-pet-to-great-britain.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural ","created_at":"2026-01-06T14:15:01.896Z","updated_at":"2026-01-06T14:15:01.896Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":720491,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/720491.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Strengthen the Animal Welfare Act 2006","background":"Amend the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to include the following policies:\r\n \r\n-Registered Breeder Index\r\n-Canine Competency Certificate\r\n-Cruelty Policing Unit\r\n-Harsher criminal penalties","additional_details":"We believe there is an animal welfare crisis and that these policies could address it. \r\n \r\nWe think that since the introduction of the XL Bully ban there has been an increase of neglect, cruelty and abandonment cases to all dogs around the UK.\r\n \r\nWe think that police officers do not have the time/resources to combat this and believe the RSPCA do not have sufficient legal powers to investigate or prosecute therefore a vicious circle occurs, animals suffer, perpetrators can escape justice and rescues pick up the damage in a never ending battle. ","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":21392,"created_at":"2025-03-01T17:00:02.536Z","updated_at":"2025-10-22T23:13:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-22T16:06:05.803Z","closed_at":"2025-10-22T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-03-01T18:02:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-19T18:28:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-06-12T07:47:45.872Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-07-10","summary":"The Animal Welfare Act provides comprehensive powers to tackle animal welfare offences. We continue to collaborate with animal welfare organisations on this and on promoting responsible dog ownership.","details":"The Animal Welfare Act 2006 (the 2006 Act) provides comprehensive powers to tackle animal welfare offences. \r\n\r\nRegarding the suggestion of a registered breeder index, the Government committed to ending puppy farming in its manifesto. DEFRA is considering the most effective way to deliver this and will be setting out next steps in due course. \r\n\r\nMore widely on dog breeding, under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (England) Regulations 2018 (the 2018 Regulations), anyone in the business of breeding and selling dogs and/or who breeds three or more litters in a 12-month period needs to have a valid licence from their local authority. Licensees must meet strict statutory minimum welfare standards, which are enforced by local authorities who have powers to issue, refuse, vary or revoke licences. DEFRA has completed a post-implementation review of the 2018 Regulations in line with the requirements of the Regulations’ review clause. The report into the review can be found here: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2018/486/impacts. The Government is considering the report’s findings and will be outlining more detail on next steps in due course. \r\n\r\nOn the suggested creation of a canine competency certificate, the Government has reconvened the Responsible Dog Ownership Taskforce, which will explore how education and training (for dogs and owners) can promote more responsible dog ownership. The taskforce will also provide recommendations on enforcement and data collection.\r\n\r\nRegarding policing and enforcement, the 2006 Act grants powers to local authorities, the Animal and Plant Health Agency and the police to investigate allegations of animal cruelty or poor welfare. Where animal welfare offences have occurred, the 2006 Act makes various enforcement options available, ranging from guidance, warning letters and improvement notices to regulatory actions, and prosecution. Local authorities will often work in close partnership with others, including animal welfare charities, such as the RSPCA, to protect the welfare of animals. Local authorities must be allowed to decide how to enforce the 2006 Act based on local priorities and resources.\r\n\r\nPowers under Section 18 of the 2006 Act also allow the police and local authority inspectors to seize an animal if a veterinary surgeon certifies that the animal is suffering or is likely to suffer if its circumstances do not change. The police or inspector may act without veterinary certification if it is not reasonably practicable to wait for a veterinary surgeon. They may also take steps where it is immediately necessary to alleviate that suffering, such as to arrange for veterinary treatment. If further steps are needed, for example further veterinary treatment or rehoming an animal, a court order may be applied for.\r\n\r\nThere are also already strict penalties in place for animal welfare offences. The Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Act 2021 introduced a maximum sentence of five years imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine for animal cruelty offences. The addition of penalty notices under the Animals (Penalty Notices) Act 2022 brought in a middle ground deterrent that provides a financial penalty of up to £5000. Penalty notices could be issued for offences such as animals living in a poor environment or animal breeders operating without a licence.\r\n\r\nMoving forward, the Government published its response to the Animal Sentience Committee’s report on animal welfare legislative compliance and enforcement. This can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/government-response-to-the-animal-sentience-committees-report-on-animal-welfare-legislation-enforcement. This sets out some of the work we are doing to improve our enforcement regime, including reforming the way we collect and publish supporting data, reviewing whether our current enforcement tools are effective, proportionate, and transparent, and considering what more could be done.\r\n\r\nThe Government has been clear that the ban on XL bullies is an important measure to protect public safety and it is committed to ensuring that the ban is fully enforced to safeguard our communities from dangerous dogs. DEFRA continues to engage closely with the police, local authorities, and rescue and rehoming organisations to monitor the impacts of the XL Bully dog ban. More broadly, DEFRA continues to work with the police, local authorities and animal welfare groups to encourage responsible dog ownership.\r\n\r\nThis Government was elected on a mandate to introduce the most ambitious plans to improve animal welfare in a generation. DEFRA has initiated a series of meetings with animal welfare groups as part of this work and it will be publishing an animal welfare strategy later this year.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs\r\n\r\nThis is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response towards the bottom of the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/720491)","created_at":"2025-06-12T07:47:45.870Z","updated_at":"2025-07-17T11:47:12.721Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":755534,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/755534.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Introduce prison sentences for deliberate cruelty to wild birds including pigeon","background":"We call on the UK Government to amend existing wildlife and animal welfare legislation to introduce custodial prison sentences for any individual who deliberately goes out with the intention of injuring or killing wild bird, specifically including pigeons, using catapults or similar weapons.","additional_details":"Under current law, deliberately killing or injuring a wild bird is already a criminal offence, yet penalties often fail to reflect the seriousness of the act or act as a sufficient deterrent. Deliberate acts of cruelty carried out for amusement or gratification demonstrate a clear disregard for animal life, public safety and the law. Despite the protection under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 section 1(1)(a) individuals who target and kill pigeons face minimal or zero consequences.","committee_note":null,"state":"open","signature_count":21235,"created_at":"2025-12-29T21:51:43.851Z","updated_at":"2026-05-09T13:28:00.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-01-30T16:31:55.785Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-29T22:49:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-01T09:37:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-02-23T16:06:36.843Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Alice Pryor","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-02-23","summary":"There are existing laws to prohibit killing or injuring wild birds, including pigeons, which can carry a custodial sentence. The government is actively considering the issue of misuse of catapults.","details":"Pigeons, like all wild birds, are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, which makes it an offence to kill or injure them, including with the use of a catapult. \r\n\r\nSignificant sanctions are already available for judges to hand down to those convicted of wildlife crimes. Anyone who commits an offence under existing legislation, such as the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, could face up to a six-month custodial sentence and/or an unlimited fine. \r\n\r\nSentencing of those convicted of wildlife crimes remains a matter for judges, and these decisions are rightly taken independently of government.\r\n\r\nIt is also an offence under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to cause an animal any unnecessary suffering. The Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Act 2021 increased the sentences available to our courts for the most serious cases of animal cruelty to pets, livestock and wild animals under human control by increasing the maximum penalty for this offence to five years’ imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine.\r\n\r\nIn the government’s Animal Welfare Strategy published in December 2025, a commitment was made to review and look to strengthen penalties for cruelty against wildlife more generally so that a disparity is addressed and they are consistent with the higher levels of sentencing available for animal welfare offences against pets and livestock. \r\n\r\nWildlife crime is unacceptable. Defra supports the National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU), which helps prevent and detect wildlife crime (including crimes involving misuse of catapults) by obtaining and disseminating intelligence, undertaking analysis which highlights local or national threats and directly assisting law enforcers in their investigations. Defra is providing £494,000 for NWCU in the financial year 2025-2026.\r\n\r\nThe NWCU attended the first of a new series of “Operation Lakeshot” meetings in January 2026. Operation Lakeshot is a working group which meets quarterly to bring together police and charities to raise awareness of the problem of wildlife crimes being carried out with catapults and will be working with partner agencies to prevent people from engaging in this crime and to support law enforcement. \r\n\r\nThe government recognises that misuse of catapults is causing great concern to some local communities whether the targets are wild or domestic animals, other people, or property. The government is clear that catapults should not be used against wildlife, property or people and is, for example, convening a roundtable to understand the problem better and to identify what more can be done.\r\n\r\nIt should be noted that certain birds, including pigeons, may be killed by an authorised person in certain licensed circumstances (such as to prevent serious damage or to preserve public health and safety) but this should not involve the use of catapults. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2026-02-23T16:06:36.841Z","updated_at":"2026-02-23T16:06:36.841Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":752959,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/752959.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban the use of netting on roofs and outdoor structures","background":"Thousands of birds are reported to get trapped in netting yearly, and many may die in pain and fear from the horrific injuries sustained trying to free themselves e.g. breaking their entangled limbs. Others may die of dehydration and starvation and rescuers are too late.","additional_details":"We believe Parliament can stop this by banning the netting causing it. The Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 places responsibility for maintenance on Property Owners. The Animal Welfare Act 2006 gives trapped wildlife the same protection as domestic animals if trapped after 25 hours. We believe neither are being observed nor enforced.\r\n \r\nSpecialist equipment is often required to free the birds. Most Organisations/Individuals responsible do not want to pay the cost. Under the Animal Sentience Act 2022, birds are sentient beings that should not be tortured.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":17397,"created_at":"2025-12-01T11:34:49.345Z","updated_at":"2026-05-09T12:50:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-02-03T15:25:32.236Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-01T14:56:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-24T18:51:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-04-17T10:19:49.957Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Denise Glee Theophilus","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-04-17","summary":"Anyone using bird netting as a deterrent has a responsibility to check and maintain it to prevent trapping and unnecessary suffering.","details":"Wildlife management is a devolved matter, and the response provided therefore relates to England only.\r\n\r\nAll wild birds are protected by law. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 makes it an offence to deliberately hurt or kill wild birds or damage their eggs and nests. They can only be removed for a very good reason, such as if they pose a risk to public health and safety.\r\n\r\nBefore taking action to remove birds, people will sometimes try to deter them by using bird netting to prevent nesting in certain places. These nets are not designed to deliberately kill or injure wildlife and, if installed correctly, they should not do so.\r\n\r\nAnybody using a net to deter birds should monitor and maintain it to prevent harm. The Animal Welfare Act 2006 does not mandate checks every 25 hours; it makes it illegal to allow or cause unnecessary suffering to wild or companion animals that are being restrained, permanently or temporarily, by their actions. This includes animals that have been caught in a net. \r\n\r\nWhile we understand that there are concerns that the use of netting to deter birds can cause harm, Defra has no plans to introduce new legislation to prohibit this. Existing protections are already in place and we would encourage anyone who has concerns about the welfare of a trapped animal to report it to the police.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2026-04-17T10:19:49.956Z","updated_at":"2026-04-17T10:19:49.956Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":700262,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700262.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban animal testing for human products and medicines","background":"We demand that the Government bans the use of animal testing/experiments for human medicines and products. This means that animal testing could not be used for new drugs, and other scientific methods would need to be used. We believe modern science can replace animal experiments.","additional_details":"Stop killing animals in the name of science. Why test human drugs on rats and dogs? We believe the public is scandalised by the welfare of research animals. Compel all research to be species-specific, evidence based and using modern science. Use modern scientific methods for 100% of the pre-clinical and clinical trial process.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":16302,"created_at":"2024-11-01T09:13:56.546Z","updated_at":"2025-11-03T10:55:22.195Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-11-19T11:12:24.130Z","closed_at":"2025-05-19T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-01T09:47:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-01-29T11:44:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-02-11T08:37:19.219Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-02-10","summary":"The government does not agree to the proposed ban. The UK still requires data from animal testing to ensure the safety of medicines and products before testing in humans.","details":"While the use of animals in science, including for human medicines, generates significant debate, the carefully regulated use of animals in scientific research currently remains necessary to protect humans and the wider environment. The Government therefore does not agree to ban the use of animal testing/experiments for human medicines and products.\r\n\r\nThe manifesto committed the Government to partner with scientists, industry, and civil society as we work towards the phasing out of animal testing. This is a long-term goal, and it will need further scientific and technical advancement and validation to reach this point. The use of animals still remains important for understanding how biological systems work, in the development of safe new medicines, treatments and technologies, and in testing chemicals. It protects humans and animals from harm and supports the safety and sustainability of our environment.\r\n\r\nIn line with our commitment to supporting the uptake and development of alternative methods to the use of animals in science, the Government actively supports and funds the development and dissemination of techniques that replace, reduce and refine the use of animals in research (the 3Rs). We also work to ensure that the UK continues to have a robust regulatory system for licensing animal studies and enforcing legal standards.\r\n\r\nThe Government will take steps to place the UK at the forefront of an alternative methods revolution and we believe that advances in a number of areas make the prospects for change much better than they have ever been. We are supporting and accelerating advances in biomedical science and technologies to reduce reliance on the use of animals in research and importantly to avoid some of the scientific limitations of animal models of human diseases. This includes stem cell research, cell culture systems that mimic the function of human organs, imaging and new computer modelling and AI techniques based on very large data sets. DSIT, Home Office and DEFRA ministers have agreed to publish an alternative methods strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods and the phasing out of animal testing. We expect to publish this strategy later this year.\r\n\r\nAlthough much research can be done without using animals, there are still purposes where use of live animals is essential, as the complexity of whole biological systems  cannot be reliably replicated using validated alternative methodologies. Animal testing is therefore required by all global medicines regulators, including the UK’s Medicine and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), to protect human health and safety. We are working with regulators to see how advances in technology can and will reduce use and phase out use in some areas.\r\n\r\nThe UK has the highest welfare score in the G7 according to the world Animal Protection Index and some of the highest animal welfare standards in the world and the use of animals in science is highly regulated. All establishments are required to have dedicated individuals, including veterinary surgeons with legal responsibilities for the care and welfare of animals, and an ethical review body, which reviews any proposals for the use of animals and promotes the 3Rs of animal use. The UK Home Office regulator conducts an integrated assessment of the compliance of all licence holders including on-site inspections. The Government has published and enforces standards for the care and accommodation of all animals bred, supplied or used for scientific purposes.\r\n\r\nThe MHRA requires testing on a suitable animal model by developers seeking regulatory approval, in the development of certain new medicines. The MHRA aligns with international regulatory bodies and the pharmaceutical industry in this position. It should be noted that the MHRA does not require all medicines to be tested, by developers, on two species as some drugs lack their primary mode of action in animal species other than primates. However, most drugs do retain their activity in animal species and safety testing in a second species is therefore required for these drugs, with dogs being one of the species that can be used. The MHRA does not itself use dogs in scientific procedures. The Government expects a gradual reduction and adaptation in the use of animals in this context, with some purposes being phased out entirely.\r\n\r\nThe UK has a world leading reputation for the delivery of the 3Rs. UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) provides core funding for the National Centre for 3Rs (NC3Rs), which works nationally and internationally to drive the uptake of 3Rs technologies and ensure that advances in the 3Rs are reflected in policy, practice and regulations on animal research. Since it was established, the NC3Rs has invested £89.3 million in research grants and almost £34 million in contracts through its CRACK IT Challenges innovation scheme to UK and EU-based institutions.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Science, Innovation and Technology","created_at":"2025-02-11T08:37:19.216Z","updated_at":"2025-02-11T08:38:35.525Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"SIT","name":"Department for Science, Innovation and Technology","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-science-innovation-and-technology"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":705772,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/705772.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Impose a lifetime ban on animal ownership for anyone convicted of animal cruelty","background":"The government should impose a lifetime ban on animal ownership for anyone who causes deliberate suffering to animals. Under current laws, courts can impose bans but these may be short-term, allowing offenders to own animals again after a short period.","additional_details":"We think anyone who harms an animal should never be trusted with one again.\r\n \r\nWe think there is no reason to believe that a person who has shown a capacity for cruelty will change, especially without proper rehabilitation. We believe a lifetime ban could ensure that once an individual is convicted of animal abuse, they will never again have the power to inflict harm on another animal under their ownership. Animal ownership is a privilege, not a right, and cruelty shouldn't be tolerated.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":16283,"created_at":"2024-11-27T22:52:22.416Z","updated_at":"2025-07-21T08:00:20.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-01-20T09:25:24.441Z","closed_at":"2025-07-20T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-12-01T22:58:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-04-17T14:17:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-05-12T12:15:45.951Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-05-12","summary":"Under the Animal Welfare Act, courts may impose animal ownership bans of varying durations on offenders. We consider it is appropriate for courts to determine such decisions on a case-by-case basis.","details":"The needless suffering of animals is always a concern, whether that suffering is deliberately inflicted, accidental, or the result of negligence. The Animal Welfare Act 2006 provides strong powers to address such cruelty, ensuring appropriate measures are in place to protect animal welfare.\r\n\r\nCausing an animal to experience unnecessary suffering is an offence under section 4 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006. Following a conviction, the court may also ban the offender from keeping animals or certain types or animals and/or order that their animals are removed from them. The court will decide how long an offender is banned for and the minimum period that must elapse before the offender can seek the termination of any order. \r\n\r\nSentencing in individual cases is a matter for our independent courts. When deciding what sentence to impose, courts must consider the circumstances of the case, including the culpability of the offender, the harm they caused or intended to cause, and any aggravating and mitigating factors. The courts also have a statutory duty to follow any relevant sentencing guidelines, developed by the independent Sentencing Council for England and Wales. Sentencing Council guidance on Animal Deprivation and Animal Disqualification orders can be found here: https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/explanatory-material/magistrates-court/item/ancillary-orders/1-introduction-to-ancillary-orders/. \r\n\r\nIn September 2024, the Sentencing Council consulted on proposals to improve the consistency, accessibility and presentation of the current information on Ancillary Orders. The Council are currently considering responses to this consultation.\r\n\r\nFurthermore, the 2006 Act is backed up by codes of practice for the welfare of certain animals (including dogs, cats and horses): https://www.gov.uk/guidance/animal-welfare-legislation-protecting-pets#codes-of-practice. \r\nThese codes of practice provide owners with information on how to meet the welfare needs of their animals, as required by the 2006 Act. Breach of a provision of these codes is not an offence itself but if proceedings are brought against someone for an offence under the 2006 Act, the Court will look at whether or not they have complied with the relevant code in deciding whether they have committed an offence.  \r\n\r\nThe Police National Computer holds all relevant information for prosecutions made for animal cruelty offences and Animal Disqualification orders under the Animal Welfare Act 2006. Certain organisations have access to this information, where appropriate, to fulfil their public function. This allows this information to be protected from misuse, but also for it to be available for organisations with a justified need to access it.  \r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2025-05-12T12:15:45.947Z","updated_at":"2025-05-12T12:17:08.561Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":709054,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/709054.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Add hedgehogs to schedule 5 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981","background":"Add hedgehogs to schedule 5 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 to give them greater protection and help save the species from total extinction. We think hedgehogs should be given the same level of protection as other British Wildlife.","additional_details":"Our Humble Hedgehog has most recently been assessed for The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species and is now listed as Near Threatened under criteria A2ac. We therefore call on the Government to move hedgehogs to schedule 5 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 to allow them greater protection and help prevent what we think is the UKs favourite animal from become consigned to history and children’s books.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":14993,"created_at":"2024-12-09T13:03:05.749Z","updated_at":"2025-08-01T20:29:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-01-31T09:40:33.618Z","closed_at":"2025-07-31T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-12-09T21:12:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-14T09:20:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-07-25T16:01:16.764Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-07-25","summary":"There are no plans to add hedgehogs to Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.","details":"Where there is evidence to show that it is necessary and effective to do so, the government may consider providing protection through legislation to regulate activities impacting on our native species.\r\n\r\nIn doing so it is important to consider whether the legislation will deliver the intended effects or whether there are more appropriate routes to delivering the same outcomes. With respect to hedgehogs, the Wild Mammals Protection Act 1996 already prohibits action which would cause unnecessary suffering to a wild mammal. While the government is concerned about their conservation status, there is no clear evidence to indicate protection under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 will be effective in supporting the recovery of the species. It does not regulate the activities linked to its decline, which are primarily habitat loss and fragmentation due to removal of field margins, hedgerows and scrub; the use of herbicides and insecticide; and road traffic.\r\n\r\nThe government is committed to taking further action to recover our threatened native species, to include hedgehogs. In England, the government will publish a revised Environmental Improvement Plan, EIP25, later this year, as our long-term plan for improving the natural environment and enjoyment of it. It will include actions to help meet the legally binding Environment Act targets, including those for biodiversity; to halt the decline in species abundance by 2030; then to reverse declines by 2042; to reduce the risk of species extinction by 2042; and restore or create more than 500,000 hectares of wildlife-rich habitat, also by 2042.\r\n\r\nLocal Nature Recovery Strategies are bringing local authorities, communities, landowners and conservation groups together to agree priorities to help nature recover and protect locally and nationally important species. They will also map specific proposals for habitat creation and improvement such as woodland, heathland and species-rich grassland, all of which will benefit vulnerable species including hedgehogs.\r\n\r\nIn addition, environmental land management schemes have provided a significant source of funding for habitat creation and management for threatened species, including hedgehogs. These provide farmers, foresters and other land managers with an opportunity to secure financial support in return for delivering environmental benefits.\r\n\r\nThe Sustainable Farming Incentive and Countryside Stewardship schemes include several actions that benefit hedgehogs. These include hedgerow creation and management, creation and management of scrub, management of field margins and field corners, and reducing the use of pesticides.\r\n\r\nNatural England, the Joint Nature Conservation Committee and the Forestry Commission have contributed to the first National Hedgehog Conservation Strategy. This strategy has identified several actions to facilitate and encourage data sharing on hedgehog ecology and conservation. In addition, Natural England is co-funding the National Hedgehog Monitoring Programme. The information gathered will produce insights into the factors causing hedgehog population decline, leading to the implementation of practical conservation measures to address this challenge. \r\n\r\nDefra has worked with the British Hedgehog Preservation Society and Peoples Trust for Endangered Species to provide advice on five easy ways everyone can help hedgehogs thrive in back gardens. This can be accessed at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/five-simple-steps-to-transform-gardens-in-to-hedgehog-havens.   \r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2025-07-25T16:01:16.761Z","updated_at":"2025-07-25T16:01:35.800Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":750817,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/750817.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Allow small pets to travel in the cabin on flights entering the UK","background":"Allow airlines, under DEFRA guidance, to offer an in-cabin travel option for small, fully documented pets on flights entering the UK, in line with international standards for other countries.","additional_details":"Many countries, including within the EU, USA, Canada, and Ireland, generally allow small, vaccinated, and microchipped pets to travel safely in the cabin, though requirements vary between different countries and airlines. The UK requires cargo travel even for very small animals, which can be stressful for the pets and costly for their owners. I believe allowing an in-cabin option would improve welfare and align the UK more closely with widely used global practices while maintaining biosecurity.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":14174,"created_at":"2025-11-15T09:53:34.595Z","updated_at":"2026-05-09T13:43:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-02-02T08:31:19.684Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-03T01:02:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-21T08:17:00.000Z","government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Eirini Zartaloudi","rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":722303,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722303.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Require by law all sports netting to be tied up when not in use","background":"We want the government to make it a legal requirement that all sports netting on sports fields, in schools and domestic gardens is tied up to prevent ensnaring wildlife and pets. Make it a fineable offence for the net owners not to do so.","additional_details":"Every year hundreds of wild animals and pets are trapped in sports netting that has been left in place. Many animals die or suffer horrific constriction injuries. We think this suffering is preventable with a little thought by net owners. We feel they need to be forced to take action by law.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":12131,"created_at":"2025-03-15T12:19:25.234Z","updated_at":"2025-10-16T19:48:20.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-15T10:47:01.981Z","closed_at":"2025-10-15T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-03-15T12:33:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-01T17:53:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-07-04T18:52:51.850Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-07-03","summary":"The Government agrees the suffering of animals caught in sports netting is preventable but through promoting awareness of the hazards to animals and responsible use of netting, not new legislation. ","details":"The Government is committed to reducing the suffering caused to wild animals and pets. Animals being caught in untied sports netting can be prevented by simply packing away or tying up all sports netting. Therefore, while there are no specific health and safety regulations related to tying up sports nets, good practice is to tie them up safely in between usage and the Government urges owners of sports netting to do this as a matter of routine. \r\n\r\nMore broadly, under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, members of the public must ensure they do not cause any unnecessary suffering to wild or companion animals that are being restrained, permanently or temporarily, by their actions. This includes animals that have been caught in a net. Therefore, as there are existing protections, DEFRA has no plans to introduce new legislation to make the leaving of netting untied a fineable offence.\r\n\r\nWildlife management is a devolved matter, and the response provided therefore relates to England only. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2025-07-04T18:52:51.847Z","updated_at":"2025-07-04T18:53:52.883Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":738567,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/738567.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Change laws regarding abuse of multiple animals","background":"We believe each animal’s suffering deserves justice. For those who abuse multiple animals, we want separate charges to be required for each animal abused, rather than a single charge. We think strong consistent sentences will deter mass animal abuse cases.","additional_details":"We want Parliament to ensure that people who abuse or kill multiple animals cannot escape with light punishments. We think each animal should be treated as a separate offence, with sentences applied for every case. We believe this would deliver justice for every animal and act as a strong deterrent against future cruelty.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":11108,"created_at":"2025-08-20T19:05:30.226Z","updated_at":"2026-05-09T07:28:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-01-13T09:54:55.317Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-21T08:14:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-20T10:23:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-04-10T07:52:06.029Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"tracey whatmore","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-04-10","summary":"The Government is firmly committed to improving animal welfare. Any incident of unnecessary suffering is unacceptable, and such cases are treated with the utmost seriousness.","details":"The Government agrees that serious animal cruelty must carry meaningful consequences. The Government is determined to ensure that those responsible for causing animal suffering are held fully accountable.\r\n\r\nCausing unnecessary suffering to an animal is an offence under section 4 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006. In recognition of the seriousness of this crime, the maximum penalty was increased from six months’ imprisonment to five years and an unlimited fine. Following a conviction for animal cruelty or welfare offences, the court may also ban the offender from keeping certain types of animals and order that their animals are removed from them.\r\n\r\nGuidance on the proper application of the law in cases involving multiple animals is already in place. The Crown Prosecution Service provides dedicated charging guidance for offences under section 4, and the Sentencing Council’s Animal Cruelty Guidelines recognise that cases involving multiple animal victims may increase the seriousness of the offence. Where multiple animals are harmed under a single charge, judges have the discretion to impose more severe penalties, up to the five‑year maximum.\r\n\r\nProportionate sentencing and judicial discretion remain essential to our justice system, and the current framework enables courts to fully reflect the seriousness of offences involving harm to multiple animals. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs ","created_at":"2026-04-10T07:52:06.026Z","updated_at":"2026-04-10T07:52:06.026Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":750741,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/750741.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Review and reform legal status of pets, and rules on animal control equipment","background":"I ask the Government to review and reform the status of pets to recognise them in all cases as sentient family members and relatives, not chattel. Set out specific strict rules on using animal-control equipment like catch poles and strong penalties if negligence or force cause harm or death to pets.","additional_details":"Losing a pet can cause the same pain as losing a family member, but the law still treats them as property. My dog, Bronson, died in a tragic incident, and I don’t want any other family to experience this. I believe clear rules on catch pole use and strong legal recognition and protections for pets could help prevent avoidable harm and ensure proper accountability in the future. These reforms could be named Bronson's Law.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":10987,"created_at":"2025-11-14T13:30:16.095Z","updated_at":"2026-05-09T00:26:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-01-08T10:04:16.853Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-14T16:06:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-29T10:51:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-02-23T16:24:34.668Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Marcus Sean flaherty","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-02-23","summary":"We are sorry to hear of Bronson’s death. Where dogs pose a risk to others, restraint poles are an important tool. We continue to support police to embed animal welfare in enforcement practice. ","details":"Thank you for supporting this petition and for raising your concerns about the tragic incident involving Bronson. We understand how painful it is to lose a much‑loved pet, and we offer our deepest sympathies to Bronson’s owner and all those affected. Pets are an important part of family life, and we recognise the strong feelings behind this petition.\r\n\r\nAnimal welfare remains a key government priority. We expect all public bodies, including police forces, to take animal welfare into account when carrying out their duties. Police officers often have to make rapid decisions in challenging and unpredictable situations, and while incidents of this nature are rare, they can require swift action to protect people and other animals. Equipment such as dog‑restraint poles are intended to help officers manage these moments safely, though it is essential that such tools are used responsibly and appropriately.\r\n\r\nPolice forces in England and Wales operate independently. Individual Chief Constables are responsible for decisions on training, operational procedures and equipment, and for ensuring officers follow national guidance, uphold professional standards and consider animal welfare in their responses.\r\n\r\nThe government continues to work with policing partners, animal welfare organisations and experts to ensure welfare considerations are embedded across enforcement practice. We expect forces to review their policies, learn from incidents and make improvements where needed.\r\n\r\nWe are grateful to everyone who signed this petition and shared their views. The government remains committed to promoting high standards of animal care and ensuring that the public and their pets feel safe, protected and treated fairly.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs\r\n","created_at":"2026-02-23T16:24:34.665Z","updated_at":"2026-02-23T16:24:34.665Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":756424,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/756424.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Create a national database of convicted animal abusers","background":"The database should be accessible to relevant authorities and regulated organisations, including local councils, animal welfare charities, veterinary professionals, licenced breeders, rescue centres, and organisations responsible for rehoming animals. Animal cruelty is a serious offence.","additional_details":"Its purpose would be to prevent convicted animal abusers from owning, working with, breeding, or having unsupervised access to animals. It would also improve enforcement of animal disqualification orders, support safeguarding efforts, enhance public and animal safety, and strengthen existing animal welfare legislation. Appropriate safeguards should be included to ensure compliance with privacy and human rights laws. At present enforcement relies on fragmented records and inconsistent checks.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":10631,"created_at":"2026-01-08T20:13:11.884Z","updated_at":"2026-05-09T10:37:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-02-06T09:01:09.384Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-09T11:33:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-21T12:41:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-04-29T12:54:24.302Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Abbi Collins","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-04-29","summary":"The Government has no plans to introduce an animal abuse register because we already have similar provisions in place.","details":"The Government does not think it would be appropriate to introduce a publicly assessable animal cruelty register. The majority of the population comply with our high animal welfare laws. In the upsetting and unacceptable instances where these laws are violated or repeatedly violated, we already have these offences recorded.\r\n\r\nAll prosecutions for animal cruelty offences under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 are currently stored on the Police National Computer. This information may be shared with appropriate organisations. In cases of concern, the information may be shared with the public when requested at the Police’s discretion.\r\n\r\nAdditionally, it is important that access to this information is restricted to protect the information from misuse while ensuring it is available for organisations with a justified need to access the information. This is consistent with the Government’s approach to the Child Sex Offender Disclosure Scheme and Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs ","created_at":"2026-04-29T12:54:24.294Z","updated_at":"2026-04-29T12:55:19.021Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":755755,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/755755.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Fund a new government-backed animal cruelty policing unit","background":"Fund a government-backed Animal Cruelty Policing Unit that has legal authority to seize animals, enforce fines and force entry in cases where there are reasonable grounds to believe that an offence against a protected animal has occurred under Section 9 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.","additional_details":"Animal welfare charities, such as the RSPCA, have no legal powers to seize animals or force entry into properties, and we believe the police seldom act on cruelty cases due to being a low priority for them. This dedicated unit could effectively bridge the gap between animal welfare charities and the police by enforcing welfare laws without burdening police forces.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":10449,"created_at":"2026-01-01T22:22:10.634Z","updated_at":"2026-05-09T09:46:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-02-10T16:22:52.449Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-01T22:36:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-14T22:56:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-03-25T16:35:42.248Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Sammie Wilkinson","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-03-25","summary":"The Government is committed to improving animal welfare. A range of established forums and partnerships already support coordinated enforcement across animal welfare legislation.","details":"We do not support the proposal to establish a new government funded Animal Cruelty Policing Unit. Establishing a new organisation or repurposing an existing organisation would be costly and complex, without clear evidence that it would improve enforcement outcomes. \r\nAs set out in the Animal Welfare Strategy for England,(https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/animal-welfare-strategy-for-england/animal-welfare-strategy-for-england) the Government’s focus is on improving compliance and enforcement outcomes to support high welfare, rather than on changing governance.\r\n\r\nThe Government encourages intelligence sharing through established groups, such as the National Animal Health and Welfare Panel, and will continue to work with the sector to drive up animal welfare standards. \r\n\r\nThe existing legislative framework already provides robust powers for investigating and responding to animal welfare concerns. Under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, local authorities, the police and the Animal & Plant Health Agency have clear authority to investigate cruelty allegations, enter premises and take necessary enforcement action. Section 18 of the Act enables inspectors or police officers to seize an animal if a veterinary surgeon certifies that it is suffering or likely to suffer and allows them to act without certification where delay would risk further harm. They may also take immediate steps to alleviate suffering, including arranging urgent veterinary treatment, and can apply to the courts for further orders where needed.\r\n\r\nThe Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Act 2021 amended the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to increase the sentences available to our courts for the most serious cases of animal cruelty. Anyone who is cruel to an animal faces being sent to prison for up to five years, or receiving an unlimited fine, or both. Following a conviction for animal cruelty or welfare offences, the court may also ban the offender from keeping certain types of animal and order that their animals are removed from them.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2026-03-25T16:35:42.246Z","updated_at":"2026-03-25T16:36:58.712Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":714335,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/714335.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Require social housing providers to allow XL bullies with exemption certificate","background":"We think local authorities should not be allowed to exclude XL bully owners with a certificate of exemption from Social Housing.\r\nWe think they should be required to remove No XL bullies clauses from Allocation policies","additional_details":"We think no one should:-\r\nBe excluded from Social Housing because they own an exempt XL. Some Councils' policies say, no XLs in new tenancies.\r\nBe told as homeless priority, to chose between a prospective home & euthanising their much loved pet.\r\nBe threatened with eviction because they couldn't go through with euthanisation.\r\nWe think the current situation is torturous, unacceptable and needs to stop urgently. We believe it impacts on Human Rights & Animal Welfare","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":6220,"created_at":"2025-01-17T12:33:09.094Z","updated_at":"2025-09-11T23:00:06.455Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-03-11T09:43:05.030Z","closed_at":"2025-09-11T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-01-18T12:26:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":748305,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/748305.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Mandate independently-monitored CCTV in all dairy farms and slaughterhouses","background":"We demand the Government mandate independently-monitored CCTV in all UK dairy farms and slaughterhouses.","additional_details":"We believe the Animal Welfare Act is being ignored in some dairy farms and slaughterhouses. We think independent CCTV is the rational, moral, and universal solution to protect animals, honest farmers, and public trust.\r\n \r\nThis isn't just about animals - it's about our own accountability, our compassion, and the world we choose to create.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":5862,"created_at":"2025-10-26T22:15:11.153Z","updated_at":"2026-05-09T09:55:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-12-02T15:36:37.391Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-28T09:28:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Rajesh Bhattacharjee","rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":700320,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700320.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban all forms of hunting and introduce harsher penalties","background":"We think we need a total ban on all forms of hunting. We also think we need harsher penalties for those who are found guilty of illegal hunting.","additional_details":"We are concerned that there are hunts on live prey still taking place. We think that those who break the law need to serve prison time and fines are not enough of a deterrent. I've seen troubling footage online of animals suffering due to illegal hunts.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":5583,"created_at":"2024-11-01T16:55:48.356Z","updated_at":"2025-05-14T15:20:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-11-13T17:08:10.684Z","closed_at":"2025-05-13T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-01T17:50:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":714902,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/714902.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Distinguish pets from other types of property in civil and family proceedings","background":"We want legislation to: \r\n1. Make a pet's welfare the paramount consideration when Courts resolve disputes over their ownership and possession. \r\n2. Recognise a pet's true value as being the value to its owner, not just its open market price. \r\n3. Require Court cases regarding pets to be expedited.","additional_details":"We feel that pets are cherished members of the family, not mere possessions. While the Animal Welfare (Sentience) Act 2022 acknowledges that some animals are sentient beings, we feel that this is not recognised in civil and family proceedings and the law needs to catch up with how society views pets today. \r\n\r\nWe believe there is an urgent need for legislative change so that a pet is no longer regarded as a replaceable item such as a table or a waistcoat.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":5147,"created_at":"2025-01-22T15:22:31.028Z","updated_at":"2025-09-27T23:00:05.494Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-03-27T17:05:05.513Z","closed_at":"2025-09-27T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-01-22T15:36:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":739674,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/739674.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Reduce the sound of fireworks to under 80 decibels for humans and animals","background":"I think fireworks are being used more frequently throughout the year and are becoming a nuisance. I want the government to mandate that fireworks should be reduced to below 80 decibels so they are safer for humans and animals.","additional_details":"","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":4533,"created_at":"2025-08-31T07:18:53.108Z","updated_at":"2026-03-25T00:00:20.386Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-24T14:45:48.287Z","closed_at":"2026-03-24T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-31T12:17:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":700049,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700049.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Reduce the maximum decibel limit on fireworks from 120 to 90","background":"We think the current noise limits were likely created based upon neurotypical healthy adults. The limit should take into account neurodiverse people and animals that have higher sensitivity to noise. ","additional_details":"We think that reducing the limit to 90 dB would reduce the stress and disruption caused by fireworks for many people and animals.\r\n\r\nThere are many accounts from dog owners, cat owners and horse owners online about their animals being stressed out, some to the point of injuring themselves. Firework noise can also cause a lot of stress to war veterans or people with PTSD. Quieter fireworks could help minimise the stress the bangs cause. We think a simple change like this could bring relief to many people and animals from firework noise.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":4197,"created_at":"2024-10-30T17:04:23.763Z","updated_at":"2025-05-05T09:52:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-11-04T18:00:57.628Z","closed_at":"2025-05-04T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-10-30T18:07:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":701925,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/701925.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Introduce stricter minimum penalties for acts of animal cruelty.","background":"We want the Government to introduce stricter penalties for animal cruelty. Current punishments can often just result in suspended sentences or fines. We think the government should introduce stricter minimum penalties, including prison sentences, to help deter abuse and ensure justice for victims.","additional_details":"We think current punishments for animal cruelty fail to reflect their severity. In our view, stricter laws, including minimum custodial sentences, would be vital to help deter cruelty and help ensure justice.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":3470,"created_at":"2024-11-16T00:57:37.317Z","updated_at":"2025-06-12T06:36:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-12-11T13:45:50.793Z","closed_at":"2025-06-11T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-16T02:28:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":727553,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727553.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Allow licences to be issued to wildlife rehabilitators to release grey squirrels","background":"We ask the Government to amend the Invasive Alien Species (Enforcement and Permitting) Order 2019 to allow Natural England to issue licences to wildlife rehabilitators to release rehabilitated grey squirrels.","additional_details":"We believe the current law criminalises compassionate wildlife care and does not affect the grey squirrel population, already well established in the UK.\r\n\r\nSome estimates suggest there are around 2.5 to 3 million grey squirrels in the UK. We think preventing the release of a small number of rehabilitated individuals by wildlife carers does not materially reduce their numbers but imposes, in our view, unnecessary penalties on those trying to help injured or orphaned animals.\r\n\r\nWe believe our proposal would remove what we see as a perverse disincentive on veterinary and conservation practitioners, without advancing the species’ spread and without compromising biosecurity objectives.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":3130,"created_at":"2025-05-14T18:01:58.218Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T00:00:19.188Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-04T08:46:47.956Z","closed_at":"2025-12-04T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-14T18:23:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":753904,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/753904.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Classify reindeer as domesticated farm animals and end Zoo Licensing requirement","background":"Reclassify reindeer as domesticated farm animals and remove the requirement for keepers to meet zoo-level geological enclosure standards. Establish fair, practical welfare regulations suited to reindeer kept by trained, responsible handlers.","additional_details":"Reindeer have been safely kept by trained handlers for decades, yet we feel outdated licensing rules impose unnecessary zoo-grade conditions not suited to farmed reindeer. We believe reclassification protects welfare, supports small businesses, and ensures practical, evidence-based regulation.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":2946,"created_at":"2025-12-08T19:40:35.543Z","updated_at":"2026-05-08T23:16:20.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-01-16T17:23:45.298Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-08T19:46:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Sarah Sutton","rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":756774,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/756774.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make a dog injuring or killing a cat a specific offence\r\n","background":"Make it an offence for a dog to kill or seriously injure a cat, whether in public or on private property. Introduce penalties for negligent dog owners and compensation for cat owners that reflects the emotional impact & distress caused plus vet bills or cremation costs.","additional_details":"Promote responsible dog ownership. Cats are beloved family members in millions of UK homes, yet there is no specific offence of a cat being attacked by a dog. If a dog kills livestock, another dog, or injures a person, laws are stronger but dog attacks on cats are not specifically covered. Often a dog can kill without consequence. This is unfair and outdated.\r\n\r\nCats deserve the same protection as other animals if not more. Their emotional value is immense. Let’s make the law reflect that.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":2503,"created_at":"2026-01-11T23:02:43.870Z","updated_at":"2026-05-09T13:39:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-02-19T14:39:41.458Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-12T05:15:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"James Clarke","rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"MoJ","name":"Ministry of Justice","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":733761,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/733761.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Review & Regulate Veterinary Care so it's Affordable & Accessible ","background":"Review and regulate veterinary care to ensure its affordable and accessible to all. Vet costs rose 60%+ from 2015-2023 with more increases since. Costs vary regionally but basic consultations can cost £65+ and some costs like advanced scans may exceed £1000, unaffordable for many.","additional_details":"We are concerned that as a result, more animals could be surrendered, and about the potential effects on vaccination and neutering rates, and preventable deaths. We believe that corporate ownership of vet practices prioritises profit over welfare, worsening the crisis. We ask the Government to investigate rising vet costs, regulate pricing, provide subsidies for essential care, and support animal rescues with vet fees. Veterinary care must not be a luxury — all pets deserve access to treatment.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":2430,"created_at":"2025-07-18T17:46:34.395Z","updated_at":"2026-04-02T09:57:46.570Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-08-05T10:27:24.729Z","closed_at":"2026-02-05T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-19T16:53:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"BT","name":"Department for Business and Trade","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-and-trade"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":728473,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/728473.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban the use of aversive dog training tools","background":"I would like the Government to ban the use of aversive tools such as electric shock collars, prong collars and invisible fencing due to the possible physical and mental harm caused to animals. I believe trauma and cruelty is unacceptable. Legislation on this topic has still not been enacted.","additional_details":"Aversive techniques of \"training\" dogs may lead to many harmful side effects. I am concerned that animals, usually dogs, are being abused with these tools that cause pain to make them do as the person inflicting it wants. I believe this is not only abusive but can also prevent dogs communicating their needs and shutting down.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":2405,"created_at":"2025-05-24T22:39:59.948Z","updated_at":"2025-12-24T20:51:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-23T10:00:21.631Z","closed_at":"2025-12-23T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-25T07:47:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":727223,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727223.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Change rules to allow pets in airplane cabins going to and from the UK","background":"We want the government to change the rules on animal travel so pets can travel with their owners (with all the documentation and vaccines in order) inside airplane cabins to and from the UK, instead of in the hold with luggage.","additional_details":"It is allowed in many other countries around the world, including in the EU, South America, and the USA, although requirements vary.\r\n \r\nPets are often seen as an extension of the family. Some airlines/countries allow pets up to 9kg to inside the airplane cabin, in their pet carrier, instead of in the cargo hold. However, they are not allowed on commercial flights coming here, regardless of their size.\r\n \r\nI think that this can not only distress the pets and owners, but can also risk their health and safety.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":2254,"created_at":"2025-05-11T10:25:46.309Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T14:45:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-04T10:17:40.516Z","closed_at":"2025-12-04T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-11T14:46:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":746888,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/746888.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Add veterinary medicine to second-degree tuition loan exemptions","background":"We ask the government to add veterinary medicine to the list of second-degree courses eligible for tuition fee loans. This would align it with medicine and dentistry, remove unfair financial barriers, and help address the UK’s critical veterinary workforce shortage.","additional_details":"Veterinary medicine is vital for animal health, farming, food safety, and public health. Many graduates discover their passion later in life, bringing valuable skills, but face tuition costs of over £45,000 with no loan support. Adding vet med to the second-degree list would make the profession more accessible, support social mobility, and ensure the UK can train enough vets to meet growing demand.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":2160,"created_at":"2025-10-14T21:15:41.233Z","updated_at":"2026-05-08T23:16:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-11-21T11:13:52.902Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-15T08:57:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Lucy park","rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":764270,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/764270.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban egg hatching programs in schools and nurseries","background":"We request:\r\n- The immediate ban of all egg hatching programs in schools and nurseries.\r\n- The development and promotion of alternative educational resources that communicate similar concepts without involving live animals.\r\n","additional_details":"We believe egg-hatching projects raise serious animal welfare concerns. Embryos can experience stress during artificial incubation, and many chicks are killed soon after hatching, sending a harmful message about the value of animal life. Incubators misrepresent the natural lifecycle by removing the mother hen, so children miss learning about maternal care and natural behaviour. Schools can teach life cycles effectively through videos, virtual simulations and classroom activities without using live animals.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":2151,"created_at":"2026-03-13T19:58:09.273Z","updated_at":"2026-05-09T11:34:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-16T08:29:08.640Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-13T21:25:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Gráinne O’Toole","rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":701661,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/701661.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Introduce the mandatory neutering of cats by 6 months of age.\r\n","background":"We are calling on the government to introduce the mandatory neutering of cats by 6 months of age unless they are registered as licensed breeding cats. Some animal charities are being overwhelmed with abandoned cats and kittens.","additional_details":"I am a volunteer Neutering Officer and see first-hand the problem the uncontrolled breeding of cats’ causes. Our branch is continually taking in unwanted cats and kittens because their owners can no longer afford to care for them. This can place a large financial burden on charities having to provide interim care and cover veterinary costs before rehoming. I believe that mandatory neutering before six months is the only way to tackle the current problem.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":2110,"created_at":"2024-11-13T15:36:33.103Z","updated_at":"2025-06-06T23:00:07.855Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-12-06T08:52:08.111Z","closed_at":"2025-06-06T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-14T17:49:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":707853,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/707853.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Collect and publish data on companion animal euthanasia","background":"Currently there is no accurate data on the euthanasia of companion animals available in England.\r\n \r\nCommercial companies given contracts by local authorities in relation to stray animals are not subject to freedom of information requests.","additional_details":"The numbers of animals euthanised is currently unknown.\r\nCurrently euthanasia numbers of companion animals in local authority pounds, local authority subcontracted companies, rescue organisations, veterinary practices, police kennels and commercial enterprises involving companion and working animals is unknown\r\n \r\nWe think there is no reason that this data should not be collected and published. The data relating to an animal is not subject to GDPR\r\n \r\nWithout transparency and publication we feel animal welfare cannot be considered a priority to the current government.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":1828,"created_at":"2024-12-04T21:40:51.378Z","updated_at":"2025-07-29T23:00:01.691Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-01-29T16:24:15.006Z","closed_at":"2025-07-29T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-12-04T22:11:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":717434,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/717434.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Create a new independent regulatory body for vets","background":"Create an independent regulatory body overseeing vets. We think incompetent or negligent vets are not being dealt with appropriately and we believe the veterinary sector in the UK is not adequately regulated. We think animal welfare is at risk.","additional_details":"We think comprehensive investigations into complaints relating to veterinarians and veterinary care are not sufficiently conducted.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":1793,"created_at":"2025-02-10T12:13:48.851Z","updated_at":"2025-10-08T23:00:02.717Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-08T14:50:21.057Z","closed_at":"2025-10-08T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-10T13:01:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":701300,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/701300.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban all Fox and Stag Hunting with Dogs - including Trail Hunting","background":"The Government said they'd ban hunting, we think now is the time to stand by this promise & ban all forms of hunting with dogs. We think allowing trail hunting hasn’t worked to prevent live animals being harmed and killed by hunts.","additional_details":"We don't believe hunts will ever switch to trail hunting. There are concerns that current hunts are attended by terrier men, badger setts are blocked and hounds aren't kept under control. There are reports of agricultural quad bikes being used illegally on public roads and hunt monitors assaulted. We believe these anti-social behaviours occur regularly, often with impunity.\r\n\r\nWe think hunting with dogs needs to be banned with no loopholes.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":1501,"created_at":"2024-11-09T18:55:24.198Z","updated_at":"2025-06-12T23:00:00.422Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-12-12T16:48:37.788Z","closed_at":"2025-06-12T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-10T12:47:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":731567,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/731567.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Remove VAT on veterinary fees for pets","background":"Following reports of some pet owners not being able to afford vet fees, we believe it is time for the Government to remove VAT from veterinary fees for pets so that it is no longer charged on animal health care which is essential for their health.","additional_details":"We believe pets are not a luxury but loved and valued companions and contribute to emotional and mental wellbeing for so many including the elderly. Some animal rescue centres may be full and unable to help, resulting in healthy animals being put down or left to suffer without basic care. We believe that if VAT is no longer charged on all veterinary fees, it could go a long way to rectifying this situation.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":1420,"created_at":"2025-06-25T22:13:22.614Z","updated_at":"2026-04-02T09:59:15.753Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-23T13:05:14.464Z","closed_at":"2026-01-23T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-26T06:51:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HMT","name":"HM Treasury","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-treasury"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":713398,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/713398.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Create a national welfare team to oversee kennels holding seized dogs","background":"We want the Government to create an independent national welfare team to monitor kennels used by police forces. This should include checking that staff are trained to meet the welfare standards in the Animal Welfare Act 2006 and reporting those who fail to meet those standards for prosecution.","additional_details":"We are concerned the XL Bully Ban has massively increased seizures under DDA. We believe that many seized animals are not having their needs met, and are in some cases being returned to owners in ill health. There are reports that some seized dogs have died in kennels. We think the vast majority of seized dogs have done nothing wrong. Instead they are seized based on looks and could be held for weeks or months before assessment. We are concerned that many seized dogs may not be a banned type and could experience trauma for nothing.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":1238,"created_at":"2025-01-09T11:27:41.059Z","updated_at":"2025-09-04T23:00:07.571Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-03-04T10:09:03.122Z","closed_at":"2025-09-04T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-01-09T14:40:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}}]}