Drivers urged to stop for cats — Dagenham and Rainham 2026

Key Points

• Margaret Mullane, MP for Dagenham and Rainham, has signed a parliamentary petition calling for a duty on drivers to stop and take reasonable steps to assist animals they have collided with, including cats.
• The current Road Traffic Act requires drivers to stop and report collisions involving certain animals such as dogs, horses and livestock, but does not mandate reporting for collisions with cats.
• Campaigners argue the law is inconsistent and outdated, and that a modern duty based on awareness of a collision — rather than the species involved — would reduce animal suffering and reflect public expectations.
• The proposed duty would not criminalise drivers who genuinely did not realise a collision occurred; it would require stopping when safe and taking reasonable steps to assist, such as calling a vet or local authority.
• The Department for Transport has previously stated it has no current plans to mandate reporting of collisions involving cats, noting that including cats under current section 170 would require primary legislation.

Dagenham and Rainham (East London Times) May 14, 2026 -Dagenham and Rainham MP Margaret Mullane has publicly added her name to a petition to Parliament calling for a straightforward, humane duty on motorists to stop when safe and take reasonable steps to assist any animal they have collided with, including cats. The move highlights a long-standing gap in the Road Traffic Act, which obliges drivers to stop and report collisions involving certain animals such as dogs, horses and farm animals, but specifically excludes cats from those duties. Campaigners and the MP argue that basing the law on whether a driver was aware a collision occurred — rather than on the species struck — would create a more coherent and compassionate legal framework.

What does the Road Traffic Act require now and why do campaigners call it outdated?

As currently framed, section 170 of the Road Traffic Act requires drivers to stop and report incidents that involve designated animals, including dogs and certain working or livestock animals, but cats are not covered by the provision. Campaigners say that distinction is historic and arbitrary: the original legislation reflected concerns about working animals and livestock, not the modern reality of widely owned companion animals such as pet cats.

Supporters of reform say the statute’s species-based carve-outs lead to inconsistent treatment on roads and that many members of the public expect drivers to take responsibility for any pet they hit, regardless of species.

What exactly are campaigners and the petition asking for, and what did Margaret Mullane say?

As reported by local and national campaign groups, the petition seeks a simple statutory duty that would require a driver who is aware they have collided with an animal to stop when it is safe to do so and to take reasonable steps to assist the injured animal — for example, by calling a veterinarian, the local authority, or the RSPCA.

Margaret Mullane told the Havering Daily that

“the law needs to be updated to better safeguard cats, that’s why I have signed the petition,”

and she emphasised that the current disparity — where drivers must report collisions with dogs but not with cats — is inconsistent and leads to unnecessary suffering.

Explore More Rainham News

A13 Rainham Dagenham Crash Causes Closure and Traffic Delays

Dagenham MP Mullane Ends Rainham Rat Infestation Crisis

Would the proposed duty criminalise drivers who genuinely did not realise a collision happened?

Campaigners and supporting MPs have been careful to stress that the proposed duty would not be designed to criminalise motorists who genuinely had no awareness a collision occurred.

Instead, the suggested reform would hinge on driver awareness: if a driver knows a collision has happened, they would be required to stop when it is safe and take reasonable steps to assist.

That approach aims to balance fairness for motorists with a higher standard of care for animals and clearer expectations for the public.

What is the government’s current position on requiring drivers to report collisions with cats?

The Department for Transport (DfT) has previously said it has no existing plans to mandate reporting of collisions involving cats or to grant police powers to prosecute drivers who fail to report such incidents. Government statements have explained that the Road Traffic Act’s list of animals was originally intended to address working animals and livestock and that bringing cats within the current section 170’s scope would necessitate primary legislation.

The DfT has, however, encouraged drivers who are able to do so to try to identify owners of domestic animals involved in collisions and to inform local authorities where appropriate, even if there is no statutory duty.

What do animal welfare groups and campaigners say about the likely impact of changing the law?

Animal welfare organisations and grassroots campaigners argue that a duty grounded in awareness rather than species would reduce avoidable suffering by increasing the number of injured animals that receive timely help and by aligning the law with common expectations about responsible behaviour on the road.

They say more injured cats would receive veterinary attention sooner, and that a clear legal requirement would encourage motorists to do the right thing where it is safe to stop. Campaigners also note that the current legal gap causes confusion among drivers and uneven outcomes for pets and their owners.

How would any statutory change be introduced and what legal challenges exist?

Expanding the Road Traffic Act to cover cats or replacing species-specific duties with an awareness-based duty would likely require primary legislation, as the existing obligations under section 170 are framed around particular animals and removing or broadening that list cannot simply be achieved by secondary measures. That means a change would need parliamentary time and would most plausibly come either as a government bill, a Private Member’s Bill, or as part of wider animal welfare or road safety legislation. Previous government responses have shown reluctance to take forward mandatory reporting for cats without further legislative change and without an assessment of practical and enforcement implications.

What practical steps are campaigners proposing alongside legal reform?

Campaigners suggest straightforward, practical measures that would accompany any legal duty: public information campaigns to explain responsibilities, guidance for drivers about how to assess safety before stopping, and clear instructions on who to call (local authority, vet, or animal welfare charity).

Supporters also recommend that the law expressly protect motorists who stop to help from civil liability where they have acted reasonably, to remove a potential disincentive to offering assistance.

Who has previously taken similar steps on related animal welfare issues in the UK?

In recent years, Parliament and successive governments have enacted or considered a number of measures aimed at strengthening protections for companion animals, from recording pet theft as a distinct offence to wider animal welfare reforms announced by Defra.

Those earlier measures show there is parliamentary appetite for targeted animal welfare reforms, but they also underline that different proposals travel on differing timetables and that each requires distinct legislative routes.

What are the arguments against imposing a legal duty on drivers to report collisions with cats?

Opponents or cautious commentators, including some government statements, have highlighted practical and enforcement concerns: the difficulty of defining which incidents would trigger a duty, the potential burden on emergency services and local authorities, and the fact that many collisions involving cats occur at night or at speed, when drivers may be unaware that a strike has taken place.

Officials have also pointed out that changing the law under the existing statutory framework would require primary legislation, which raises questions about parliamentary time and prioritisation.

What happens next and who will decide if the law should change?

The petition supported by Margaret Mullane will add weight to calls for reform and may prompt parliamentary consideration, but any change ultimately depends on the government or a successful Private Member’s Bill securing time and cross-party support in Parliament.

Animal welfare organisations are likely to continue lobbying MPs, while some local MPs may raise the issue in debates or table questions to press the government for clarity on whether it will act.

Background of the development after the news

The present legal framework dates back to the Road Traffic Act and related historical statutes that distinguished between working/livestock animals and other species when imposing duties on drivers; cats were not included in those lists, reflecting the original policy focus on animals used in agriculture or work. Over recent years, growing public concern about pet welfare and high-profile campaigns have pushed animal issues higher up the policy agenda, producing reforms such as recognition of pet theft as a distinct offence and broader Defra-led animal welfare initiatives; however, integrating cats into the Road Traffic Act or creating a new awareness-based duty would require fresh primary legislation and careful consideration of enforcement and practical guidance.

Prediction:

If Parliament or ministers respond to the petition and introduce a statutory duty requiring drivers who are aware they have collided with an animal to stop and take reasonable steps to assist, the immediate effect would likely be an increase in the number of injured cats receiving timely treatment, reducing suffering and aligning the law with many members of the public’s expectations.

Drivers would need clear guidance and public information so they understand when they are legally obliged to stop and what constitutes “reasonable steps”, while local authorities and veterinary services might experience an uptick in calls and incidents to manage; if the duty also includes protections for motorists who help, it could reduce reluctance to stop. Conversely, if the government maintains its current position against mandatory reporting, the petition and MPs’ support may nonetheless keep public pressure on ministers and could lead to non-legislative measures such as awareness campaigns or strengthened local protocols for handling reports of injured cats.