Road Traffic Collision Reporting: Cats

Debate between Tom Gordon and Martin Wrigley

Monday 26th October 2026 Westminster Hall

[Martin Wrigley]

Yes, that is a very good way forward.

The campaigners have answered the Government’s points with some care. On the working animals argument, CatsMatter has done its own sums. Using a University of Bristol study and Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs farm figures, it reckons that there could be around 60,000 working farm cats in England, against roughly 65,000 working sheepdogs. It is open that those are estimates, but I represent a great many farms, and I can tell Members that farm cats in Devon work as hard as farm dogs and earn their keep.

The campaigners also make a broader point, and I have some sympathy with it: many people now think of their cats as one of the family—Ignatius is certainly part of ours. When they see that dogs are covered and cats are not, they feel that the law simply does not value their animal in the same way.

Other countries have updated their laws to include cats, including Italy and Hong Kong. CatsMatter argues that even if a new duty of stopping for cats was rarely enforced, it would tell drivers what decent behaviour on the road looks like. The question is whether the reasons for leaving cats out of section 170 still hold up in 2026.

Cats Protection, the UK’s leading cat welfare charity, wants exactly the same outcome as the petitioners. Nobody wants an injured cat to be left to suffer, or an owner to be left forever wondering. However, the charity has real concerns about using this particular piece of law.

[Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)]

I thank the 335 people in my constituency of Harrogate and Knaresborough who signed this petition. My hon. Friend mentioned earlier that the Government seemingly have no plans at this point to change things, and there is the conversation around whether the Road Traffic Act 1988 is the mechanism to achieve change. Does he agree that the message that we can send today from this House is that, even if it is not legally required, the right, moral thing to do is for people to notify the police and to try to find the owner? That is a message that we can all send from here today.

[Martin Wrigley]

I agree with my hon. Friend that that is the right, moral thing to do and we need to encourage drivers to do it.

The animals in section 170 are ones whose owners are expected to keep them under control or fenced in, and the law has long accepted that cats roam. Cats Protection worries that bringing cats into a framework created for dogs and livestock could open up questions about an owner’s liability if a roaming cat causes an accident. It might also nudge people towards keeping their cats indoors—speaking as Ignatius’s feeder and door-opener, I am not sure he would take kindly to that.

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals supports the aim of the petition and says it would not stand in the way of a change in the law. Its concern is a practical one. A duty to report to the police would not in itself get an injured cat to a vet, or ensure that that a dead one is scanned for a chip. Police forces are stretched, and ringing 101 will not bring help to the roadside.

The sense of unfairness that the petitioners feel is real, and I understand it. It has been fascinating to open the debate on this petition, because the fact of the matter is that everyone involved—on both sides of the petition—is united around one thing: they all care deeply about cats; they just disagree about whether changing section 170 is the right answer. What they also agree on is what should happen if a cat is hit. If the cat is alive, it needs to see a vet as quickly as possible. Alive or dead, it should be scanned for a microchip, so that its owner can be found and told.

That brings me on to what drivers actually face. Picture someone on a dark road who has just hit a cat. They are shaken and they do not know whether to ring the police, the council, a vet, a charity or highways, because responsibility is split across all of them. I would like to hear from the Minister what the Government will do to give that driver a clear answer. That may or may not mean amending the Road Traffic Act 1988. Whatever the mechanism, cats should not be left to suffer at the roadside, and their owners should not spend years wondering what happened to them.

I thank Mandy and Tiya and everyone at CatsMatter for their work, and I look forward to hearing from colleagues and the Minister’s reply.

Women’s State Pension Age: Financial Redress

Debate between Tom Gordon and Martin Wrigley

Thursday 3rd July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to be called to speak so early in the debate. I congratulate the hon. Member for Salford (Rebecca Long Bailey) on securing this debate. There is not much more that can be said, as she has put the case so eloquently, but there is one key point I want to get on the record: broadly speaking, as the hon. Lady eloquently said, this issue crosses the House and there is a broad understanding that there has been an injustice. For me, this is about fairness and what will happen going forward if people lose faith in organisations such as the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.

[Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for Salford (Rebecca Long Bailey) on securing this debate, and I thank her for her work. Does my hon. Friend agree that this is about trust in Government and a betrayal of trust for all of us who stood there with placards saying, “I support the WASPI women”? They should be following that up.

[Tom Gordon]

I completely agree with my hon. Friend. At a time when trust in Government and politicians is so low, it is imperative that we do all we can in this place to right that wrong.

To get an idea of the level of support across the House, I would like to see a vote in Parliament about whether we should have a fair compensation scheme. Whenever I speak to WASPI women in my constituency or elsewhere, the main thing they want is to be listened to. The key thread that resonates with all these women is that they feel completely sidelined and ignored. My hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour) made the point earlier that parties of all persuasions have held placards and made promises and pledges—and the Liberal Democrats know all too well about the danger of making promises that cannot be delivered on. I would like all parties and all politicians to be held accountable for the promises that they failed to deliver on.

I represent a place that is broadly characterised as fairly affluent and wealthy, but there are real issues with poverty in Harrogate and Knaresborough, though it is often hidden. The hon. Member for Salford eloquently made the point that when WASPI women were growing up and working, they were already disadvantaged, and this is a further disadvantage. It is incumbent on us all to right that wrong.