The Animals (Penalty Notices) Bill is a private member’s bill sponsored in the House of Lords by Lord Randall of Uxbridge (Conservative). It was introduced in the House of Commons by Andrew Rosindell (Conservative MP for Romford) and completed its House of Commons stages on 4 February 2022. The bill has received support from the Government and the Opposition. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has provided the explanatory notes for the bill.

The bill had its first reading in the House of Lords on 7 February 2022. Its second reading is scheduled for 18 March 2022.

What are fixed penalty notices?

Fixed penalty notices (FPNs) may be issued by various enforcement agencies, such as the police, as an alternative to prosecution in relation to a range of offences. This includes driving and anti-social behaviour offences. The Sentencing Council states that unlike conditional cautions, an admission of guilt is “not a prerequisite to issuing a penalty notice”.

An offender issued with an FPN could still be prosecuted if they:

  • contest the FPN and ask to be tried for the offence before a court instead; or
  • fail to pay the penalty within the period stipulated in the notice and the prosecutor decides to charge the person with the offence set out in the FPN. In some cases of non-payment, the penalty is automatically registered and enforceable as a fine without the need for recourse to the courts. This tends to apply to FPNs issued for certain road traffic offences.

What is the prevalence of animal cruelty in England and Wales?

Both the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) record data for suspected cases for certain animal offences. This includes offences under sections 4 to 8 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 which seek to prevent harm towards animals.

Ministry of Justice data

The latest MoJ data revealed that 1,743 people were prosecuted for offences relating to animal cruelty in England and Wales in 2020, with 908 people convicted. This represented a decrease on the previous year with 3,029 people prosecuted and 2,006 people convicted. The table below details the number of people prosecuted and convicted for animal cruelty in England and Wales between 2017 and 2020.

Number of people prosecuted and convicted for animal cruelty in England and Wales, 2017 to 2020
2017 2018 2019 2020
Prosecuted 2,725 3,195 3,029 1,743
Animal cruelty under sections 4–8 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 1,632 1,702 1,719 949
Other cruelty to animal offences 1,093 1,493 1,310 794
Convicted 1,849 2,043 2,006 908
Animal cruelty under sections 4–8 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 1,156 1,114 1,150 539
Other cruelty to animal offences 693 929 856 369

(Ministry of Justice, ‘Criminal justice system statistics quarterly: December 2020—All offence prosecutions and convictions by Home Office offence code’, 20 May 2021)

RSPCA data

As part of its remit, the RSPCA has pursued private prosecutions for animal cruelty offences in England and Wales. In its latest report, published in March 2020, the RSPCA revealed that 1,685 people suspected of animal cruelty were reported to RSPCA prosecutions. This was a decrease on the previous year, with 1,703 people reported. The following table details the number of cases and suspects of animal cruelty reported to RSPCA prosecutions in England and Wales between 2017 and 2019:

Cases and suspects reported to RSPCA prosecutions in England and Wales, 2017 to 2019
2017 2018 2019
Cases reported to RSPCA prosecutions 1,309 1,182 1,179
Suspects reported to RSPCA prosecutions 1,776 1,703 1,685

(Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, RSPCA Prosecutions Annual Report 2019, 2020, p 30)

Despite the fall in the number of cases reported to RSPCA prosecutions in 2019, the organisation reported that calls to its 24-hour cruelty line had increased from 1,175,193 calls in 2018 to 1,218,364 calls in 2019.

What would the bill do?

The Animal (Penalty Notices) Bill would enable the secretary of state to introduce FPNs for offences relating to animals and animal products. It comprises of nine clauses.

FPNs

Clause 1 of the bill sets out the offences made under the bill and the role of enforcement authorities in issuing an FPN. Subsection (1) sets out that an enforcement authority may issue an FPN if they are “satisfied beyond reasonable doubt” that a person had committed a relevant offence in England. Subsection (2) states that the secretary of state may prescribe an offence by regulations as one for which an FPN can be issued. Subsection (3) details the relevant acts to which FPNs may be applied. This includes offences under:

Subsection (4) defines an “enforcement authority” as a person who is specified by regulations made by the secretary of state. The regulations may specify more than one person in relation to any relevant offence. Subsection (5) states that the person specified by regulations could be the secretary of state, a local authority or any other person considered appropriate by the secretary of state. Subsection (6) states that an FPN issued under clause 1 may be withdrawn at any time by the enforcement authority that issued it.

Clause 2 sets out the role of police constables in issuing FPNs for offences relating to dangerous dogs in accordance with the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. Subsection (1) sets out that a constable may issue an FPN if they are “satisfied beyond reasonable doubt” that a specified offence has been committed in England and Wales. Subsection (3) states that the offences within this subsection are for offences made under the 1991 Act covering breed types (sections 1 and 3) and the disqualification of keeping a dog or failing to comply with an order to have a dog destroyed (section 4(8)). Subsection (4) states that the constable, or a constable from the same police force as the constable who issued an FPN, under this clause can withdraw it.

Clause 3 outlines the structure and effect of an FPN. Subsection (2) details that an FPN gives the recipient an “opportunity” to pay a specified financial penalty to “discharge any liability to conviction” for an offence within a “relevant period”. Subsection (4) sets out that this would be a period of 28 days starting on the date the FPN was issued.

Subsection (3) states that the maximum FPN penalty may not exceed whichever is the lesser amount of either: £5,000; or the maximum fine the offender could be liable to pay if convicted under the same offence. Subsection (5) details what information the notice must explain, including why the person issuing the notice is satisfied that the person has committed the offence and when and how payment may be made.

Subsection (6) sets out the proceedings for an unpaid FPN, which applies when a notice is issued and not withdrawn. The subsection states that proceedings will not be instituted until after the relevant notice period has expired for the person to pay the fixed penalty. Subsection (6)(b) details that the person who committed the offence may not be convicted if they pay the penalty in full within the relevant period, or if they pay 50% of the notice within 14 days of the start of the relevant period.

Clause 4 details the factors to be considered by an enforcement authority prior to issuing an FPN. This includes the seriousness of a person’s conduct and whether a person had taken action to eliminate or reduce a risk of harm to an animal. The clause also notes that the secretary of state must issue guidance on enforcement, which an enforcement authority must have regard to. The guidance must be laid before Parliament after it is given.

Clause 5 states that proceeds from FPNs will be paid into the Government’s Consolidated Fund. Subsection (2) sets out the costs that may be deducted by enforcement authorities or chief officers of police before the remaining funds are paid into the Consolidated Fund. Costs include those for investigating the offence relevant to the FPN and the cost incurred when issuing the notice.

General

Clause 6 would require enforcement authorities and the police to provide an annual report to the secretary of state by the end of each financial year (1 April to 31 March), which must include information on the: number of notices issued; financial amounts of the penalties issued; and reason the notice was issued. Under subsection (2) of the clause, the secretary of state would have to publish the report.

Clauses 7 and 8 cover regulations and interpretation. Clause 7 notes that regulations under the act would be made using the negative procedure.

Lastly, clause 9 covers territorial extent and commencement. It would extend to England and Wales. Clauses 1(2) to (5), 2(2) and (3), 4(3) and (4), 7 and 8 would come into force two months after royal assent. The other provisions would come into force on a date set by the secretary of state in regulations.

What happened in the House of Commons?

The bill was first introduced in the House of Commons on 16 June 2021 by Andrew Rosindell (Conservative MP for Romford).

Second reading

The bill received its second reading in the House of Commons on 29 October 2021.

Opening the debate, Andrew Rosindell said that “for the most severe crimes, criminal prosecution will always be the most appropriate course of action”. However, he suggested that some offences against animals “can occur without the presence of ill will or due to a genuine mistake”, such as transgressions relating to the recording of livestock movements. Therefore, Mr Rosindell stated that his bill would give individuals an “opportunity to pay a penalty for any type of transgression, similar to a speeding ticket, as an alternative to a potential court case”.

During second reading, the bill was supported by the Government and the Opposition. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Jo Churchill, stated that penalty notices would be an “important tool” in “encouraging animal keepers to follow the rules and discourage them from committing more serious offences”. Consequently, the bill had the Government’s “full support”.

The Shadow Minister for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Daniel Zeichner, said that he was initially concerned that offences in the Animal Welfare Act 2006 “were at risk of being downgraded to the level of a parking ticket”. However, in listening to Mr Rosindell’s opening remarks and having spoken to the Minister, he had felt “reassured that that is not the aim [of the bill]”.

Remaining stages

No amendments to the bill were considered during the public bill committee debate on 8 December 2021.

During committee stage, Andrew Rosindell argued that his bill would “reform fundamentally the way that we enforce animal health, biosecurity and welfare across all farmed and kept animals in England”. Mr Rosindell stated that it would do this by “building on the skeleton of our existing domestic framework for enforcement, which cruelly has few options beyond prosecution”.

Speaking on behalf of the Labour Party, Daniel Zeichner raised several concerns with the bill. These included the bill referring to a “whole series of pieces of quite complicated legislation” relating to animal offences, which he argued that “without going through each piece of legislation in detail, one would struggle to know what level of offence this bill refers to”. Similarly, Mr Zeichner expressed concern that the bill did not contain provisions for an appeals system.

Despite such concerns, Mr Zeichner stated that his party would be supporting the bill but would be “monitor[ing] it closely to ensure that it does what the Government and the honourable Member for Romford says it does”.

Responding to the concerns raised, Jo Churchill stated that further guidance for specific offences would be laid before Parliament, which would “ensure that enforcers strike the right balance between advice, guidance, penalty notices and prosecutions”.

There were no amendments tabled for the bill’s report stage and it progressed to third reading on 4 February 2022.

During third reading, Andrew Rosindell thanked Members of Parliament and the Government for supporting the bill. Additionally, Mr Rosindell also thanked several non-governmental organisations for their support, including the RSPCA, Battersea Dogs and Cats Home and the National Farmers Union.

The bill passed third reading without division.

Read more

Cover image from Pixabay.