Louis asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry will consider increasing the height and weight allowance for local mixed breed dogs approved for living in HDB flats under the Project ADORE scheme as the majority of dogs in our shelters and from the streets do not currently qualify for adoption under the scheme.

Mr Lawrence Wong (MND): Under Project ADORE, mixed breed dogs that are up to 50 cm tall at the shoulder and weighing up to 15 kg may be rehomed in HDB flats. These limits are set at sizes roughly equivalent to the current approved dog breeds for HDB flats. Dogs of this size are generally considered to be more easily carried and controlled, especially in confined spaces such as lifts.

I appreciate the Member’s intention to rehome more local mixed breed dogs. MND also supports this objective. But in making any changes to Project ADORE, we have to also take into consideration the concerns raised by HDB residents who have reservations about their neighbours keeping larger dogs in HDB flats. This is why we are taking steps to bring in more partners on the Project, and to broaden our engagement with residents. Ultimately, we want this Project to succeed. For that to happen, we should not rush the implementation, but must ensure that any changes to the criteria are broadly accepted by residents living in our HDB estates.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry will consider setting up a dedicated commission to handle all issues related to animal welfare that is similar to the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) either by expanding the scope of the current Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration Committee for Animal Welfare or setting up a new committee comprising of animal welfare groups, businesses in the pet industry, veterinarians, grassroots community leaders and other relevant stakeholders.

Mr Lawrence Wong (MND): There are currently no plans to set up a dedicated commission to handle issues related to animal welfare.

The Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) already works closely with multi-stakeholder committees to enhance animal welfare. This approach has led to positive results. For example, AVA had close working relations with the Animal Welfare Legislative Review Committee (AWLRC), a group made up of Members of Parliament, grassroots leaders, animal welfare groups, the pet industry, and the veterinary profession. AVA worked with AWLRC in a review of Singapore’s animal welfare legislation in 2012. AVA also supported the AWLRC’s recommendations to enhance stakeholders’ collaboration in animal welfare.

In addition, AVA has close working relations with the Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration Committee (MSCC), which comprises representatives from animal welfare groups, the pet industry, the veterinary profession, and the community at large. AVA worked with them on the recently issued Code of Animal Welfare for the pet industry. AVA continues to engage with the MSCC on issues relating to training for the pet industry, as well as on outreach initiatives to promote awareness about animal welfare.

AVA will continue to engage with the relevant stakeholders to further the cause of animal welfare in Singapore.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development with regard to the breeding of dogs, cats and rabbits in Singapore for the purpose of sale as pets (a) whether AVA keeps track of the proportion of these animals sold versus the numbers bred; and (b) what happens to the animals that are not able to be sold.

Mr Lawrence Wong (MND): Currently, AVA does not track the proportion of cats and rabbits sold versus the numbers bred. AVA only has information on the number of dogs bred, via the production records submitted by pet breeders. AVA does not track the number of dogs sold.

But moving forward, AVA will be able to track such data for dogs. AVA will soon require pet businesses such as pet farms and pet retailers to licence all dogs in their establishments, including dogs bred. When a dog is sold, the new owner has to register a licence and provide AVA with his/her particulars. With this information, AVA will be able to determine the proportion of dogs sold versus the numbers bred.

Pet businesses may continue to keep the unsold animals or put them up for adoption. Under no circumstances should pet businesses abandon or ill-treat any animals under their charge. Under the Animals and Birds Act, all owners have a duty of care to animals under their charge. A pet business convicted for failure of duty of care may be liable for a fine of up to $40,000, or a jail term of up to two years, or both, for the first offence.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry will consider banning the practice of debarking dogs.

Mr Lawrence Wong (MND): AVA does not encourage the practice of debarking. It should be performed only as an absolute last resort. The Code of Ethics for Veterinarians, which was co-developed by AVA and the Singapore Veterinary Association, requires veterinarians to advise their clients of non-surgical alternatives and to ensure that all reasonable efforts have been made to manage the barking problem prior to performing the surgery. Failure to do so can result in written warnings, composition fines, or even suspension or revocation of veterinary licences.

That said, there are some dog owners who are unable to resolve the barking problem despite having tried all other measures. For example, their dogs may be suffering from Canine Cognitive Dysfunction whose symptoms include compulsive behaviours like prolonged barking for no apparent reason. In such cases, debarking could well be the only option left to allow owners to keep their dogs, instead of having to give them up. That would be a worse outcome for both the animal and the responsible owner.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry will consider banning the practice of declawing cats except for medical reasons.

Mr Lawrence Wong (MND): AVA does not encourage the practice of declawing cats. Such a procedure should only be performed as an absolute last resort or as an alternative to euthanasia. The Code of Ethics for Veterinarians, which was co-developed by AVA and the Singapore Veterinary Association, requires veterinarians to advise their clients about non-surgical alternatives and to ensure that all reasonable efforts have been made to manage scratching problems prior to performing any surgery. Failure to do so can result in written warnings, composition fines, or even suspension or revocation of veterinary licences.

That said, there have been occasions where persistent scratching can harm the cat itself, other pets, or humans in the household. For instance, repeated scratches could seriously injure a person who has severe immune-deficiencies or bleeding disorders. In such cases, if the owners are unable to resolve the issue despite having tried all other measures, declawing could well be the only option left for them to keep their cats. The other option would be to give them up. This would be a worse outcome for both the animal and the responsible owner.

AVA will continue to educate cat owners and raise awareness on alternatives to declawing. Vets, animal welfare groups and the public can also help to spread the message.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry will start a licensing system for the ownership of cats to prevent cat abandonment.

Mr Lawrence Wong (MND): Pet licensing primarily serves to protect public health. As dogs are the most common cause of rabies transmission from animals to humans globally, AVA requires them to be licensed to enable traceability for the purposes of disease control.

AVA has put in place several measures to deter pet abandonment. First, AVA conducts public education initiatives to promote responsible pet ownership, including school talks and community events. Second, AVA requires pet shops to do pre-sales screenings to assess and ensure that their customers are suitable pet owners. Finally, owners who are found to have abandoned their pets may be liable to a maximum fine of $10,000 and a jail term of up to 12 months, for first-time convictions. AVA investigates all feedback on alleged pet abandonment and will take enforcement action where required.

AVA will continue to work with stakeholders to review measures to promote responsible pet ownership and deter pet abandonment.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry will introduce a licensing requirement for pet boarding businesses in addition to the standards and best practices listed in the Code of Animal Welfare (for the Pet Industry).

Ms Sun Xueling (for the Minister for National Development): Mr Speaker, all pet business operators, including pet boarders, have a duty of care towards the animals they handle. Beyond the Code of Animal Welfare, AVA can take enforcement action against pet boarding businesses under the Animals and Birds Act for failing in this duty of care, or for animal cruelty.

AVA currently licenses pet shops and pet farms, some of which have commercial pet boarding facilities. AVA intends to undertake a holistic review of the regulatory approach for the pet industry, including how best to regulate pet boarding businesses. As part of this review, AVA will engage its stakeholders, including pet owners, industry players and Animal Welfare Groups, to find the right balance across their various needs and interests.

Louis: I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the reply and I am very thankful that we are going to review this as well. The first clarification is how long this review is going to take. Secondly, while this review is in process, currently, do we have a list of pet boarders in Singapore? I am asking this so that we can do spot checks on these pet boarders. We do have this Code, but again we need to start to check on them, rather than we be reactive; which means, whenever a complaint comes in, abuse has happened and then we check the pet boarders. Can we be proactive now and do spot checks to make sure that abuse does not happen in the first place?

Ms Sun Xueling: The AVA has a list of commercial boarders in pet farms. On the timeline that the Member asked, as I mentioned earlier in my reply, we will be revealing more details in due course, but rest assured that it is going to be a holistic review. We will be engaging various stakeholders when we conduct this review. I had mentioned pet owners, industry players and Animal Welfare Groups because there is a delicate balance that we need to seek between their various needs and their interests. 

Louis: I understand that we have a list of the boarders at the pet farms but as with the recent case of the Platinum Dogs Club, it was not in the pet farm and that perhaps is where the issue lies. Whether we have a list of pet boarders outside the pet farms. And again, I really hope that you can provide at least some time frame of how long this review is going to take because I am pretty sure that would be the questions on the ground.

Ms Sun Xueling: Pet boarders currently are not required to be licensed unless they are on farm land. I think we also need to be mindful that there are many pet boarders out there who are do-gooders, well-meaning pet lovers, who provide pet boarding facilities. But like I mentioned earlier, we will be undertaking a holistic review. And there are various different stakeholders that we have to consult. So, rest assured it is not that I do not want to give you a timeline, but because we want to be comprehensive and holistic about it. Therefore, I do not want to pre-commit. But rest assured, it is going to be a holistic review.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis delivered the following budget cut on Preventing Cat Abandonment at Committee of Supply 2019:

Louis: Sir, in the context of recent discussion on the disamenities that come from irresponsible feeding, I would like to touch on a related topic: cat abandonment.

Cat abandonment is one of the reasons for an increase in the stray cat population. It is a heartless act. It also causes problems as cat feeders struggle with the sudden increase in numbers and residents also suffer disamenities. In one recent case, 11 cats were abandoned overnight.

We have strong legislation against pet abandonment. It is easy to enforce these laws with dogs as dogs are micro-chipped and licensed and we can trace the owner. But there is difficulty with cats as there is currently no licensing requirement or micro-chipping requirement. 

We have fined a person previously for abandoning her cat. She left the pet carrier there with her details. But how many owners will abandon their cat and leave traces of their details? In other cases it is not so straightforward.

Can I ask the Ministry to look into plans to strengthen measures to deter cat abandonment for instance, by micro-chipping and licensing pet cats?

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Ms Sun Xueling (The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development): Mr Louis Ng asked how AVA addresses cat abandonment. AVA takes animal abandonment very seriously, and will investigate all related feedback. To establish the owner of an abandoned pet, AVA gathers evidence by walking the ground, interviewing witnesses, and reviewing CCTV footage. Persons convicted of pet abandonment can be fined up to $10,000 and/or imprisoned for up to 12 months for a first-time offence.

Nonetheless, we recognise the importance of strengthening upstream controls to deter pet abandonment. The Cat Welfare Society currently manages Project Love Cats, a pilot community-owned responsible cat ownership programme in Chong Pang, with the support of Government agencies. Under this pilot, CWS has been working with the community on microchipping pet cats to strengthen owner accountability. We can consider further expansion when the Chong Pang pilot meets these outcomes, and when there is strong community support in other parts of Singapore. In addition, the AVA intends to undertake a holistic review of the regulatory approach for pet issues, including how to promote responsible pet ownership and deter abandonment.

Louis: For Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling, I thank her for mentioning that we are going to review pet ownership in Singapore. But could I just ask, very specifically whether MND is reviewing the possibility of micro-chipping and licensing pet cats in Singapore so that we can deter pet cat abandonment.

Ms Sun Xueling: I thank Member Mr Louis Ng for his questions. The review that the AVA will be embarking on, as I had mentioned, is to look at how we can promote more responsible pet ownership, as well as deter abandonment. So, we will look at a variety of measures. We will also be looking into the additional measures that you talked about. This will be part of our entire holistic review of what is the best regulatory approach to deter pet abandonment.

I would just like to add that I think it is very important that the education part of it goes upstream. And work with the community and pet owners, to encourage them to be responsible pet owners, I think that is going to be very important. Because when you look at regulations, we have to balance the needs of various stakeholders. So, I just want to add that.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry will consider banning the practices of declawing cats and debarking dogs in the upcoming review of standards in the pet sector.

Mr Lawrence Wong (MND): NParks does not encourage the practices of declawing cats and debarking dogs. Such procedures should only be performed as an absolute last resort, or as an alternative to euthanasia. 

NParks has a framework in place to regulate these practices. The Code of Ethics for Veterinarians requires veterinarians to advise their clients of non-surgical alternatives and to ensure that all reasonable efforts have been made to manage the problem prior to performing such surgeries. Failure to do so can result in written warnings, composition fines, or even suspension or revocation of veterinary licences. This regulatory approach remains relevant.

NParks will continue to educate pet owners and raise awareness on alternatives to declawing and debarking.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development for each year in the past three years (a) how many dogs have died while licensed to (i) dog farms and (ii) pet shops respectively; (b) how many of these dogs died as a result of euthanasia in these premises respectively; and (c) whether the Ministry will start collecting such data if it is not already doing so.

Mr Lawrence Wong (MND): In 2019, dog farms and pet shops reported that 134 and 14 licensed dogs died at their establishments respectively. In 2018, the figures were 162 and 26 licensed dogs respectively. We do not have figures for 2017, as the requirement for these establishments to report deaths of licensed dogs in their care only came into effect then.  

Currently, NParks does not require the establishments to provide information on the cause of death. NParks will look into this as part of its ongoing efforts to enhance traceability of animals, in order to protect public and animal health. 

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development whether he can provide an update on its investigations into alleged animal welfare-related offences by the operator of the pet boarding facility Platinium Dogs Club.

Mr Lawrence Wong (MND): NParks has concluded its investigations into the alleged animal welfare-related offences by the operator of the Platinium Dogs Club. The matter is currently undergoing legal assessment. It would not be appropriate to share investigation findings at this stage. 

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis delivered his budget cut on Increasing Size of Dogs in HDB Flats at Committee of Supply 2020 as follow:

Louis: I am glad that NParks have now a 10% increase in height limit for local mixed breed dogs to be re-home under Project ADORE. The weight of the dog will also be removed as a criterion. This good news. There is about 20% more local mixed breed dogs can be re-homed at HDB flats each year. But we can do more. Can MND provide the rationale for not removing the height criterion as well? Many more dogs can finally find a forever home if we remove the height criterion.  

I understand that MND's concern is that the smaller dogs are generally considered to be more easily carried and controlled, especially in confined spaces such as lifts. However, size is not a good proxy of the behaviour or temperament of a dog. Researchers have found that larger dogs are perceived as more obedient, less anxious and less aggressive compared to smaller dogs. As the saying goes, "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog." 

Ms Sun Xueling (The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development): Eight years ago, we worked with our AWG partners to launch Project ADORE to do this. Given the good progress, NParks has recently reviewed the size limits for Project ADORE. I thank Mr Louis Ng for his proposal to further re-look the height limit for Project ADORE. NParks will work closely with our AWG partners to successfully implement the latest revision first before we review the project again. It bears mentioning that Project ADORE has been successful largely because of careful, sensitive and gradual implementation. NParks has to balance the objective of rehoming more dogs with the concerns that some residents have over larger dogs in HDB flats.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development for the nine licence fee categories in Part II and Part III of the First Schedule of the Animal and Birds (Dog Licensing Rules), how many (i) dog farms and (ii) pets shops respectively, have paid the licence fee in (i) 2018 and (ii) 2019 respectively under each category.

Mr Lawrence Wong (MND): Table 1 provides the number of dog farms that paid annual licence fees for dogs kept for breeding at their premises under Part II of the First Schedule of the Animals and Birds (Dog Licensing and Control) Rules.

Table 2 provides the number of dog farms and pet shops that paid annual licence fees for dogs kept for sale at their premises under Part III of the First Schedule of the Animals and Birds (Dog Licensing and Control) Rules.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development in each year over the past 10 years, how many veterinarians have received (i) written warnings (ii) composition fines and (iii) suspension or revocation of their veterinary licences as a result of their failure to advise their clients about non-surgical alternatives to declawing cats and debarking dogs or to ensure that all reasonable efforts have been made to manage cat scratching or dog barking problems prior to performing any surgery.

Mr Lawrence Wong (MND): Over the past 10 years, NParks has not received reports of nor come across such behaviours by veterinarians.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Following feedback from Louis’s Facebook post sharing SPCA’s Teach with Kindness campaign, Louis asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry will consider banning the use of electric shock collars and prong collars in animal training; (b) if so, what is the timeline for implementing the ban; and (c) if not why not.

Mr Desmond Lee (MND): NParks will take enforcement action when animal training methods cause unnecessary pain or suffering to animals, regardless of whether devices such as electric shock collars or prong collars are used.

While some countries have banned the use of electric shock collars and prong collars, their use is not prohibited in many other jurisdictions, including Singapore. Some of these jurisdictions have imposed restrictions on their use. For instance, in New Zealand, electric shock collars can only be used to address serious behavioural problems, and when other training methods have failed. In the state of Victoria, Australia, electric shock collars can only be used by veterinarians, qualified dog trainers, or people acting under their instruction.

The multi-stakeholder Rehoming and Adoption Work Group (RAWG), which has been recently established to review practices related to the rehoming and adoption of dogs, will study this issue.

There are many methods available to train animals without compromising their welfare, such as reward-based training, whereby treats, toys, play or attention are used to reinforce desirable behaviour. Importantly, we need to better use science-based training methods in the rehabilitation of the animal and avoid unnecessary pain or suffering to it.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry will consider imposing a moratorium on declawing cats and debarking dogs and monitor whether pet euthanasia rates change during this moratorium to study the relationship between such practices and pet euthanasia.

Mr Desmond Lee (MND): NParks does not encourage the practices of declawing cats and debarking dogs. However, there could be instances where such procedures are required as a last resort, in order for owners to keep their pets.

The Code of Ethics for Veterinarians considers declawing cats and debarking dogs unethical unless these procedures are performed as an alternative to euthanasia. Veterinarians are required to advise the owners of non-surgical alternatives and to ensure that all reasonable efforts have been made to manage the issue prior to performing such procedures. Failure to do so can result in written warnings, composition fines, or suspension or revocation of veterinary licences. 

It would not be desirable to impose a moratorium on these procedures for the purpose of monitoring changes to pet euthanasia rates, as this could lead to the unnecessary euthanasia of pets. If the public comes across suspected cases where declawing of cats or debarking of dogs have been performed without due justification, we ask that they inform NParks, so that it can investigate the cases and take enforcement action if warranted.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Update on Investigations into Alleged Animal Welfare-related Offences by Operator of Pet Boarding Facility Platinium Dogs Club

Louis asked the Minister for National Development whether he can provide a further update on the Ministry's investigations into alleged animal welfare-related offences by the operator of the pet boarding facility Platinium Dogs Club.

Mr Desmond Lee (MND): NParks has concluded its investigations into the alleged animal welfare-related offences by the operator of the pet boarding facility Platinium Dogs Club. As the case is now before the Court, NParks is unable to comment further on this matter. 

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Review of Regulatory Approach for Pet Industry and Pet Boarding Businesses

Louis asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether he can provide an update on the Ministry's review on the regulatory approach for the pet industry and pet boarding businesses; and (b) whether the Ministry will be introducing a licensing requirement for pet boarding businesses in addition to the standards and best practices listed in the Code of Animal Welfare (for Pet Industry).

Mr Desmond Lee (MND): In 2019, NParks embarked on a review of the pet sector to raise animal health and welfare standards, and safeguard public health. Since then, NParks has consulted the public and worked closely with stakeholders, and has made progress in several areas. For example, in 2020, NParks implemented one-time licensing for sterilised dogs and introduced vaccination guidelines to strengthen the animal health system. NParks also worked on increasing dog rehoming rates by allowing more mixed-breed dogs to be rehomed in HDB flats under Project ADORE. To further improve dog rehoming and adoption processes, a multi-stakeholder Rehoming and Adoption Work Group was formed in October last year. We thank the Member for being part of this work group. 

As part of the pet sector review, NParks also intends to raise the standards of service providers in the pet sector. For example, NParks plans to license commercial pet boarding facilities based on the scale and nature of their operations. It is also reviewing the licensing conditions for pet boarders and breeders, including the housing and management, healthcare and traceability of the animals. NParks has been working with relevant stakeholders on this revised regulatory framework, and will announce more details when ready.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry has reviewed the possibility of requiring dog farms and pet shops to provide information on the cause of death of licensed dogs; (b) if so, what are the results of the review; and (c) if not, when does the Ministry plan to do so.

Mr Desmond Lee (MND): To safeguard the health and welfare of animals, NParks is reviewing its pet business licensing conditions including the housing and management, healthcare, and traceability of the animals. As part of this review, NParks intends to require dog farms to provide information on the cause of death of dogs under their care. NParks is also considering this requirement for pet shops. This will improve NParks' biosurveillance of the animal population and allow it to take immediate measures to prevent the spread of diseases, including potential zoonotic ones, in the event of a disease incursion. More details will be announced when ready.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development in respect of animal cruelty and abuse cases in the past five years (a) how many cases have been investigated annually; (b) how many cases have been issued warning letters; (c) how many cases have been issued compound fines; (d) how many cases have been prosecuted and fines issued; (e) how many cases have been prosecuted and jail terms issued; and (f) whether the Ministry is considering increasing the penalties for such cases.

Mr Desmond Lee (MND): From 2017 to 2020, NParks investigated close to 1,200 alleged animal cruelty and abuse cases annually. Since 2017, 87 persons have been issued warning letters, 113 persons have been issued compound fines, 40 persons have been sentenced in court and fined, and 23 persons have been sentenced in court with jail terms issued.

We take a serious view of all acts of animal cruelty and abuse. Individuals who are found guilty of committing acts of animal cruelty can be charged under the Animals and Birds Act. First-time offenders can face a maximum fine of $15,000, or a jail term of up to 18 months, or both. Repeat offenders can face a maximum fine of $30,000, or a jail term of up to three years, or both. We will continue to review the penalties under the Animals and Birds Act to ensure that they remain effective in deterring acts of animal cruelty and abuse.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry will consider increasing the period a person is disqualified from owning any animal or any class of animals from the current maximum of 12 months under section 43B of the Animals and Birds Act; (b) if not, why not; and (c) if so, whether the Ministry will consult with stakeholders and the general public in considering the extent of the increase.

Mr Desmond Lee (MND): We take a serious view of all acts of animal cruelty and abuse. Individuals who are found guilty of such acts, or of failing to care for their animals, can be charged under the Animals and Birds Act. 

For animal cruelty cases, first-time offenders can face a maximum fine of $15,000, or a jail term of up to 18 months, or both. Repeat offenders can face a maximum fine of $30,000, or a jail term of up to three years, or both. In addition to these penalties, offenders may be disqualified from owning any animal for up to 12 months. This serves as an added deterrent against acts of animal cruelty and safeguards animal welfare.  

We are reviewing the penalties under the Animals and Birds Act to ensure that they remain effective in deterring acts of animal cruelty and abuse. The review will take into account feedback from consultations with the relevant stakeholders and the public. Beyond regulation and enforcement, NParks will continue to work closely with stakeholders, such as animal welfare groups and veterinarians, to raise public awareness on responsible pet ownership and animal care. 

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry will consider studying the effects of the ban on third-party puppy and kitten sales under Lucy’s Law in England; (b) if so, whether the Ministry will consider implementing a similar law in Singapore which is adapted to our local context; and (c) if not, why not.

Mr Desmond Lee (MND): Lucy’s Law was recently passed in England in April 2020. Hence, it is too early for us to assess its effectiveness on improving animal welfare, and its impact on the pet industry. NParks will consider regulatory developments in other jurisdictions, including Lucy’s Law, when it reviews its regulations to safeguard animal welfare.

In Singapore, we are similarly concerned about the welfare of pets that are bred and sold. NParks has a licensing framework in place to safeguard the health and welfare of animals at pet breeders and pet shops. In October 2021, NParks announced tightened licensing conditions for pet breeders to raise industry standards and improve the health and welfare of animals. To ensure traceability and compliance with licensing conditions, NParks conducts regular inspections on licensed pet breeders and pet shops. NParks also investigates reports of unlicensed pet breeding and sale, and takes enforcement action against the offenders.

With this regulatory framework in place, NParks does not see the need to introduce a ban on third-party puppy and kitten sales at this juncture. NParks will continue to review regulations under the Animals and Birds Act with relevant stakeholders to ensure that they remain effective in safeguarding animal health and welfare. Should the public come across animal welfare breaches, they should report them to NParks for investigation.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Update on Banning of Practice of Debarking Dogs

Louis asked the Minister for National Development whether he can provide an update on the banning of the practice of debarking dogs.

Mr Desmond Lee (MND): NParks takes a firm stance against the practice of debarking dogs. Such a procedure should only be performed as an absolute last resort, or as an alternative to euthanasia.

NParks has a framework in place to regulate this practice. The Code of Ethics for Veterinarians requires veterinarians to advise pet owners of non-surgical alternatives and to ensure that all reasonable efforts have been made to manage or treat the issue prior to debarking. Failure to do so can result in written warnings, composition fines, suspension, or revocation of veterinary licences. This regulatory approach remains relevant. NParks will continue to educate pet owners and raise awareness on alternatives to debarking. 

Should the public come across suspected cases where debarking of dogs has been performed without due justification, they can inform NParks, so that it can investigate and take the necessary actions.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Pet Abandonment Cases Investigates and Prosecuted in Past Five Years

(Supplementary Question) Louis: Thank you, Sir. I thank the Minister of State for the reply. Could I follow up quickly on whether we would consider micro-chipping the cats? This is something I have pushed for for many years because I think that will help to reduce the abandonment of cats, as for example, like dogs that we now license and micro-chip. It is pretty hard to abandon them because we would be able to trace the owners quite easily.

Mr Tan Kiat How (for the Minister for National Development): Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for the supplementary question. As the Member would be aware, we have started a comprehensive review of the pet sector, involving various stakeholders, looking at training regimes or trainers, looking at rehabilitation, adoption, routines and practices with the animal welfare groups, engaging breeders and boarders, and also individual pet owners. We have undertaken a review and put in place various new practices, guidelines to raise standards of pet care, training, breeding, boarding, as well as the kinds of licensing regimes. 

The Member had asked about the micro-chipping of cats. This will also be taken into consideration as we review the pet sector.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry will consider banning the practice of declawing cats and, if not, why not.

Mr Desmond Lee (MND): NParks takes a firm stance against the practice of declawing cats. Such a procedure should only be performed as an absolute last resort, or as an alternative to euthanasia.

NParks has a framework in place to regulate this practice. The Code of Ethics for Veterinarians requires veterinarians to advise pet owners of non-surgical alternatives and to ensure that all reasonable efforts have been made to manage or treat the issue prior to declawing. Failure to do so can result in written warnings, composition fines, or even suspension or revocation of veterinary licences. This regulatory approach remains relevant. NParks will also continue to work with its animal welfare partners to educate pet owners, such as through the Animal and Veterinary Service’s webinars and Pets’ Day Out workshops, on alternative ways to manage the behavioural issues of cats.

Should the public come across suspected cases where declawing of cats has been performed without due justification, we ask that they inform NParks, so that it can investigate and take the necessary actions. 

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)

Louis asked the Minister for National Development in view of the new guidelines for dog training and behaviour rehabilitation (a) when will the review of the use of animal training devices such as shock and prong collars be completed; and (b) whether NParks will consider imposing restrictions on their use while the review is being conducted.

Mr Desmond Lee (MND): The Rehoming and Adoption Workgroup, comprising NParks, animal welfare groups, veterinarians, and trainers, had earlier discussed the use of dog training devices. NParks had also engaged pet owners on this topic through a public consultation exercise in October 2021. 

Based on the findings, there was consensus that training devices that cause pain, fear and distress to animals should generally be avoided. There were also some trainers and members of the public who viewed that there could be certain circumstances that warrant the use of such devices, and that it was important to ensure their proper use. NParks is further engaging stakeholders, such as dog trainers, animal welfare groups and veterinarians, and will review the use of shock and prong collars this year. This includes developing further guidelines to educate trainers and pet owners on the proper use of training devices. Meanwhile, NParks has since released guidelines on dog training and rehabilitation in January 2022. 

Currently, NParks investigates and takes enforcement action in cases where animal training methods cause unnecessary pain or suffering to animals. In line with the recently released dog training and rehabilitation guidelines, NParks will continue to educate pet owners and raise awareness on the least intrusive, minimally aversive approach to animal training, through various platforms such as online webinars, Pets’ Day Out events, workshops and volunteer programmes. This science-based approach takes into account factors such as an animal’s motivational state, stress levels, and physical health in developing a training and behaviour modification plan, which is safer and more effective for the animal.

Source: Hansard (Parliament of Singapore)