Road Traffic Collision Reporting: Cats

Johanna Baxter Excerpts

Monday 26th October 2026 Westminster Hall

[Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. I thank the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) for opening this debate. I agree with him that the Members contributing to this debate have in their heart concern for the protection, welfare and wellbeing of cats. I also thank the 383 people across Paisley and Renfrewshire South who signed the petition. I draw the House’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on cats. I also declare an interest as the proud servant of two cats, Clement Cattlee and Mo Meowlam. [Laughter.] That always gets a chuckle in the House.

As someone who loves cats very deeply, this issue hits close to home. I have spent many an evening sat up wondering where Clem has got to—she is the one that wanders—and have on more than one occasion sent my husband out in his dressing gown to find her. Like every animal lover in this place, the thought of any pet being hurt or lost in a road traffic accident is truly heartbreaking. I know the agonising distress that families face when a beloved companion goes missing and hold immense sympathy for the heartfelt intentions behind the motion we are debating.

Under the current Road Traffic Act, drivers must report collisions involving dogs and livestock, but not cats, even though the highway code rightly encourages drivers to report animal accidents and contact owners wherever possible. It is entirely understandable that so many compassionate people want to close that gap, especially given the disparity in treatment between cats and dogs, which are predominantly the pets we have in households across the country.

There is a complexity to those legislative changes. I am conscious that the country’s leading cat charity, Cats Protection, warned that introducing them could have various unintended consequences, including the imposition of criminal and civil liability on the owners of cats involved in collisions, which could inadvertently harm the very animals we are all trying to protect. The owners of animals currently covered by the Act have a legal duty to keep them under control or properly contained. If they cause an accident, their owners can face criminal liability and insurance claims. As cat owners, we know that cats are different from dogs. They are uniquely independent. They are curious creatures and their instinct is to roam, explore and experience the outdoors, which is so fundamental to who they are—certainly, trying to control Clem would be a very difficult task indeed.

The current law recognises that cats have a right to roam and cannot realistically be controlled in the same way as dogs or livestock, so bringing cats into a framework designed for dogs and livestock risks creating new legal responsibilities around containment, control and liability for cat owners. That could push cat owners to keep their cats indoors, preventing them from performing the natural behaviours that they need to perform to live happy, healthy lives.

The Cats Protection charity estimates that 3% of UK cats are involved in road traffic accidents, and behind that figure is a deeply personal, painful loss for the families of those pets. However, we must ensure that our response does not create a broader harm for the millions of happy, free-roaming cats across the country. That does not mean that something cannot be done—it can and it must—but we must channel our shared compassion into solutions that truly work. As we have heard, microchipping is the most reliable way to reunite pets with their families. That is now legally mandated in England, and I urge our devolved Administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to follow suit so that every pet across the UK has that vital safeguard.

On scanning, highways bodies across England and Scotland already collect and scan cat road victims and notify their owners. Cats Protection has published a scanning guide for local authorities, and I urge local authorities across the country to ensure that they have sight of that and are utilising it. Going back to my previous point, however, that is effective in ensuring that families receive the closure they so desperately seek only when a cat has a microchip.

On drivers, we are a nation of animal lovers, so stopping to help an injured animal should not be too much to ask of any decent, moral person. A driver who hits a cat should take them to a vet for emergency treatment, where they can also be scanned for a microchip—that is the quickest way to identify the owner. Increasing driver education so that motorists know how to act quickly and who to contact will save lives, bringing injured pets to emergency care when every minute counts.

I share the deep empathy and true love for these wonderful animals that has brought us all to this Chamber. That must also mean that we protect them by preserving who they are, including their roaming instincts. Every loss on our roads is a tragedy, but taking away a cat’s freedom to roam would be a quiet tragedy experienced by many millions more.