Agenda item

In accordance with the Animal Welfare Act 2006, Buckinghamshire Council, in its role as Licensing Authority, was responsible for licensing operators of businesses carrying out prescribed activities involving animals. In addition, the Council was also responsible for licensing keepers of animals that were defined as dangerous wild animals and for the licensing of zoos.  

There was currently no animal licensing policy covering the Buckinghamshire Council area. Whilst there was no statutory requirement for a policy under any of the legislation relating to these types of licence, it was considered appropriate to produce a single policy which sets out a clear and consistent framework for the Council’s approach to animal licensing. The adoption of a policy supported the Council’s commitment to transparency, fairness and openness when determining applications and ensuring compliance with the relevant legislation.

The draft Animal Licensing Policy (“the Policy”) provided guidance on the various application processes, a brief overview of relevant legislation and links to statutory guidance. The legislation and regulations, under which animal licences were issued, required the Council to determine, among other factors, whether the applicant was suitable or in the case of The Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (England) Regulations 2018 “fit and proper” in terms of their ability to comply with licence conditions and to be an operator for that type of activity. Whilst there was no legal definition of “fit and proper” in the regulations, the Policy provided an opportunity to outline matters, which the Council would take into consideration when deciding if someone was suitable to hold a licence. 

As well as the need to comply with the different statutory licensing requirements, it was of public interest to ensure the general safety and wellbeing of animals, those responsible for them and members of the public who might come into contact with them.  The adoption of a policy would also give the Council an opportunity to set out its expectations around safeguarding for operators of businesses whose activities took place around children and vulnerable persons.

On the 11 April 2023, the Licensing Committee approved a new draft Animal Licensing Policy for consultation. The Policy had now been subject to a full consultation process, which ran from 20 April 2023 to 31 May 2023. The purpose of this report was to provide feedback on the responses received as part of the consultation and to identify any changes to be made to the draft Policy in response to the consultation. 

In total there were 26 responses to the consultation survey. 25 were received via the online consultation through Your Voice Bucks and one response was posted to the Council. The summary of these responses was attached as Appendix 1. The comments provided with responses were shown in Appendix 2. Following this consultation process, the draft Policy with proposed amendments was attached as Appendix 3.   A summary of the proposed amendments was set out in section 2 of the report.

If approved by Committee, an implementation date for the new Animal Licensing Policy would be agreed between the Chairman of the Licensing Committee and the Head of the Licensing Service, taking into consideration any practicalities such as updating the Council’s webpages, application forms and processes.

Members were invited to ask questions of officers.  A Member asked why it was that the fee for a dangerous wild animal renewal application was cheaper than a new dangerous wild animal application, but the renewal for a zoo application was more expensive than a new zoo application. In response, officers explained that the licensing service was now going through a process to review the fees and there would be a paper coming to the Licensing Committee on fees in February.  It was agreed that the Member’s question would be answered in the report, which would be submitted to the February meeting.

A Member raised a concern regarding the requirement for applicants to provide evidence of a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check and was of the opinion that the requirement should not be included in the Policy.  The Member commented that the requirement was additional bureaucracy, which wasn’t necessary and that it only showed known information on the applicant at the time of the check.  The check also did not, as far as they were aware, include animal welfare offences. The Member also argued that the Government did not think a DBS check was required, as it was not covered in the legislation. 

In response to the Member’s concern regarding the requirements for applicants to provide evidence of a DBS check, officers advised that although there was no specific requirement to provide a DBS check in the legislation under which these licences were issued, the legislation was clear that the Council must be satisfied that an applicant was suitable and, with regard to Licensing of Activities Involving Animals (LAIA) licences, that the applicant should provide whatever information the Local Authority required as part of the application process. There was currently no central database to record animal welfare offences or disqualifications relating to animals to check against. In addition, there was a recognition that other types of offences might need to be taken into consideration if they indicated that an individual was not suitable to be granted a licence to operate that type of business or unlikely to be compliant with licence conditions, such as violent offences and fraud.   A DBS check was also more likely to deter those not suitable from applying for a licence. For all these reasons, it was felt appropriate to include this requirement in the Policy and was considered a proportionate requirement to be made of applicants in order to assist in satisfying the Council that it was granting licences to people who were suitable. Furthermore, a clear majority of those who responded to the consultation agreed that applicants should provide evidence of a DBS check to hold a licence.

It was noted that the Council would not be able to ask for an enhanced disclosure and would only be able to ask for a basic disclosure.  With regards to whether animal welfare offences would show on a DBS check, officers clarified that it was not that no animal welfare offences would show on a DBS check, but that a DBS check would possibly not show any convictions for prosecutions undertaken by the RSPCA or the Local Authority. However, officers had checked with the Disclosure and Barring Service and Local Authorities could add their convictions onto a DBS. 

A Member raised the issue of goldfish being given away as prizes at fairs in Buckinghamshire and asked whether this would be covered under the Animal Licensing Policy. Officers advised that this would not be covered by the Animal Licensing Policy given the nature of that type of trader.  The Council wouldn’t be able to licence them for selling animals as pets as they were unlikely to be based in the area. They would have to be licenced in the area they were based and the Local Authority, where they were based, would then have to prove that they had a trading income that required them to have a licence. The Council was aware of the welfare concerns around goldfish being given away as prizes and did not approve of the practice.   Over the summer when this issue was raised, officers contacted the Green Spaces Team and provided them with the information on the licensing position, but then recommended that if the Council had its own land, which it was hiring or leasing, then it might be possible to impose a condition to not allow pets to be given as prizes.

Officers clarified the circumstances in which someone who breeds a family pet would require a licence and explained that it depended on whether they were acting commercially or not. Officers advised that anyone, who was not sure if they required a licence, should contact the licensing service for advice.    In response to a question regarding what impact the Dangerous Dogs Act would have on this Policy, officers explained that it was unlikely to have much of an impact. The Council was aware of the XL Bullies ban, which would be coming into effect from the 31 December 2023, and the Council would be contacting any of its licence holders, that were currently involved in dog breeding or the boarding of dogs, to sign post them to the Government guidance.  Officers were not aware of anyone holding a licence to breed XL Bullies in Buckinghamshire.  To date there had only been one or two enquiries on the matter.

On a vote being taken the recommendation was proposed by Cllr Dhillon and seconded by Cllr Gomm and:-

RESOLVED that the final version of the Animal Licensing Policy, as set out in appendix 3, be agreed with an implementation date to be agreed with the Chairman of the Licensing Committee and Head of Licensing Service.