kola Posted March 9, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 BBC Radio Wales today's debate on dangerous dogs with Alison Green-DDA Watch and James Beaufoy-Sec. of the SBT Club can be heard online here http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00rbnd9 debate started about three minutes after noon Amanda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rumpole Posted March 9, 2010 Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 melp and roger mugford are on channel 4 at 7 o clock she apologises in advance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantan Posted March 9, 2010 Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 I just saw her. It was short and sweet but she came across all posh and grown up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melp Posted March 9, 2010 Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 Posh? LOL. 20 minute interview and they show one sentence! Alfie looked nice though didn't he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kola Posted March 9, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 it looked like it was cut right down, Humphrey was extremely cool in the studio! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pingu Posted March 9, 2010 Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 Posh? LOL. 20 minute interview and they show one sentence! Alfie looked nice though didn't he? i particularly liked the way he gave the ball to you .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted March 9, 2010 Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 Dogs Trust "take" on things, includes compulsory chipping & insurance - they suggest that many exisiting household insurances provide cover already but if not they can offer cover under a £20 per year membership scheme so whilst I've only seen the headlines I've no idea where the Daily Express £600 came from - "labour bashing" in the election run up perhaps? They aregue for the extension to private property (though it doesn't say why & I too looked at that with doubt) They also want repeal of all BSL & penalties focused on owners http://dogstrustblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/dogs-trusts-response-to-governments.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kola Posted March 10, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 I heard the £600 plus for insurance mentioned on the radio too, sure it was LBC, then there was the comparison of tigers and pit bull terriers Kit Malthouse interview: http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8556000/8556997.stm?ls and the thousand dangerous dogs taken of London streets Radio Norfolk BBC is covering it tomorrow morning, allie green is due on, not sure on the time thou amanda x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cycas Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 (edited) I reckon the journalists throwing the numbers about are confusing liability insurance with full medical insurance. Though even then I'd have thought £600 would be pushing it no? Edited March 10, 2010 by cycas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rumpole Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 The £600 is a figure bandied about a few months ago but was in relation to a suggestion of bringing back the dog license at a vastly increased rate of £600 this was NOT suggested by the government and is nothing to do with insurance. I posted about the dogs trust scheme in doggy chat a few months ago £20 gets you third party liability for up to 10 dogs. The media seem as usual to be scaremongering calling the proposals a tax on dog ownership yet it will be insurance companies not the government who stand to gain from this. The dog owning public who are up in arms about having to chip and insure are failing to see that it protects them, because in todays no win no fee society if their dog does cause an injury (or even damage to a car if they are run over)they already stand to be sued which could cost thousands and would also have to pay legal costs to fight any action whereas for twenty quid ish the insurance company would fight an unfounded case for you as they do with car insurances and pay out if you lose. What a bargain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kola Posted March 10, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 the peter levy show dangerous dogs and dda watch about 40 minutes into it http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p006pqyd/The_Peter_Levy_Show_09_03_2010/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackmagic Posted March 10, 2010 Report Share Posted March 10, 2010 They aregue for the extension to private property (though it doesn't say why & I too looked at that with doubt) [ because the cases where a dog attacks someone in a house are currently excluded as it is not a public place. They want to be able to prosecute these cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kola Posted March 11, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2010 Mayhew response; http://themayhewanimalhome.blogspot.com/2010/03/response-to-government-plans-to-toughen.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted March 11, 2010 Report Share Posted March 11, 2010 The £600 is a figure bandied about a few months ago but was in relation to a suggestion of bringing back the dog license at a vastly increased rate of £600 this was NOT suggested by the government and is nothing to do with insurance. I posted about the dogs trust scheme in doggy chat a few months ago £20 gets you third party liability for up to 10 dogs. The media seem as usual to be scaremongering calling the proposals a tax on dog ownership yet it will be insurance companies not the government who stand to gain from this. The dog owning public who are up in arms about having to chip and insure are failing to see that it protects them, because in todays no win no fee society if their dog does cause an injury (or even damage to a car if they are run over)they already stand to be sued which could cost thousands and would also have to pay legal costs to fight any action whereas for twenty quid ish the insurance company would fight an unfounded case for you as they do with car insurances and pay out if you lose. What a bargain Thanks for the info. on the £600. I'm not sure whether I missed your post in Jan or just didn't do anything at the time & forgot about it but I agree a bargain at that. However it's even more so now as in reply to a Facebook poster yesterday, asking if he joined twice to cover his 18 dogs. they reply it was a mistake & "it's now unlimited provided they're all pets (not a business) and not registered under the Dangerous Dogs Act (though if they are registered as exempt that's fine) see 10/3/09 11.54 am in reply to Johnathon Tate "this may be a silly question......" http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?ref=profile&id=100000556871139#!/DogsTrust?ref=mf I think it's anything that will sell a paper (and sway opinion to their view point) personally as the same papers are anti dog when it suits, now they're complaining about controls on dogs There was a statistic quoted on Dogs Trust Official response link (above) - that in a survey 88% of dog owners would favour the compulsory chipping law they proposed so given that 88% of dogs out there are not chipped I think legal requirements are the only thing they can do. If it inconveniences / costs some responsible dog owners marginally but helps a lot more dogs in need it's surely a price worth paying, even if some do have their own reasons to try & convince us otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rumpole Posted March 11, 2010 Report Share Posted March 11, 2010 well said the mayhew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts