(Photo reference from Give Asia, a recent photo taken inside a breeding farm in Singapore)

OVERVIEW

This submission is offered as a ground-level observation on companion animal acquisition practices in Singapore, particularly in relation to third-party sales of puppies and kittens.

It respectfully highlights several welfare and transparency considerations, and shares international developments— namely the United Kingdom’s “Lucy’s Law”—for reference as Singapore continues to strengthen its animal welfare framework.

The intention is to support ongoing efforts by the authorities and stakeholders in promoting responsible pet ownership, transparency in breeding practices, and high standards of animal welfare.

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS

In 2020, the British government introduced Lucy’s Law, named after a cavalier King Charles spaniel who suffered years of neglect in a puppy farm. The law bans the sale of puppies and kittens through third-party commercial sellers, meaning pet shops can no longer sell them. Instead, animals must be bought directly from breeders in transparent, accountable conditions (viewed with the mother, in the living environment)—or adopted from registered shelters.

This matters because third-party selling removes transparency. Puppy mills mainly continue because buyers do not see inside, or meet the parent dogs. If they did, they would not buy from there. So breeders would be forced to improve conditions. Unfortunately, it is not possible to force breeders to have compassion for their animals, but buyers do have purchase power.

THE CURRENT WELFARE GAP

While existing regulations under the Animal & Veterinary Service (AVS) provide baseline requirements for breeding and sales, there remains a distinction between minimum regulatory compliance and higher welfare outcomes in practice.

One area of discussion is the level of transparency available to prospective buyers, particularly when animals are not viewed in their breeding environment or with parent animals.

SYSTEMIC ANIMAL WELFARE CONCERNS

Reports of ex-breeding dogs being rescued in poor condition are not rare. Many arrive with severe dental disease, untreated infections, and long-term health problems. These are not isolated incidents—they point to a structural issue where animal welfare is compromised in favour of output and profit.

If buyers were required to see parent dogs and breeding environments directly, welfare standards would be naturally forced upward.

THE PROBLEM OF IMPORTED PUPPIES

Some pet shops import puppies from countries like the UK and Australia, often marketed as having “higher welfare standards.”

But this raises another issue: very young puppies are subjected to long-distance air travel, across continents. This can cause significant stress, and potential long-term behavioural issues such as anxiety. No ethical breeding system should rely on transporting vulnerable puppies internationally for sale in retail environments.

PET SHOPS AND IMPULSE BUYING

Pet shops inherently encourage impulse buying. Puppies displayed in glass enclosures risk being treated as products rather than sentient beings.

The UK government recognised that third-party sales encourage rushed decisions. By contrast, requiring buyers to:

• Visit breeders
• See living conditions
• Engage in a more deliberate process …encourages responsible, informed pet ownership and reduces abandonment and neglect.

CONCLUSION

Ongoing review of welfare frameworks is a natural part of ensuring that standards continue to evolve in line with public expectations and international best practices.

This submission respectfully shares observations and an international reference point for consideration, particularly as global approaches to companion animal welfare continue to evolve.

It is offered in support of continued dialogue on how Singapore may further strengthen transparency, accountability, and welfare outcomes in companion animal acquisition practices.