Fair enough. All I can say is this. Lord Baker is on record as saying the KC supported the 1991 DDA, this is the law that introduced BSL to this country. The KC backed it. This is documented in the consultation papers, it is not a suggestion or a rumour it is documented fact. The KC are as responsible as any organisation for saddling us with BSL. I would not ask you to believe everything you read in the press, especially BSL stuff but that site I link to is my site, I wrote that feature and I have gone on record before (here)
Kennel Club Make Dangerous Dogs U-Turn
and re-stated that the KC supported the introduction of Lord Baker's DDA. I challenged the KC to deny that this was true. They didn't deny it, because, quite simply, they couldn't.
You seem very passionate about BSL and I applaud you. I am myself. But I would strongly urge you not to believe the KC as they are trying to re-write history to suit their current stance. Who is to say that had they NOT supported Lord Baker, we might not even have BSL right now?
This is official Parliamentary record from 1991
House of Commons Hansard Debates for 10 Jun 1991
Quote:
|
As I undertook in my statement, I have had extensive consultations with many of the organisations with an interest in dogs--the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the Kennel Club, the Joint Advisory Committee on Pets in Society and the Canine Defence League--as well as the veterninary organisations, the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons and the British Veterinary Association. All support the aim of this legislation, which clause 1 sets out, of eliminating dogs bred for fighting, such as the pit bull and the tosa, from our society.
|
^^This is as conclusive as I could possibly post that KC supported BSL.