Purrs In Our Hearts - Cat Forum UK
Cat General => General Cat Chat => Topic started by: Gill (sneakiefeline) on August 23, 2007, 23:42:13 PM
-
Way back when many of us signed a petition asking the governement to look into the way that RSPCA managed themselves............have just received thsis!!
I know the way that weasel words are used in Whitehall and the way politicians dont answer questions and this is a classic on both counts and nothing to do with what the petiton was asking...........dont theu know what happens or dont they wanna know grrrrrrrrrrrr
The Animal Welfare Act 2006 - as with most other legislation - is a 'common informers act'. That means any person or organisation can bring a private prosecution under the legislation. It is because anyone can initiate criminal proceedings under animal welfare legislation that the RSPCA successfully prosecutes between 750 and 1,000 people each year who have been found to have caused unnecessary suffering to animals.
There is no evidence to show that this current arrangement is not working. Indeed the evidence suggests the contrary: the RSPCA are successful in some 97% of cases they bring before the courts (2004). That is a very high success rate and clearly justifies the RSPCA's general approach. The Government is not aware of any complaints from Magistrates' Courts about the way the RSPCA bring cases before them and we are satisfied that there are adequate safeguards in place within the judicial system to ensure that the right to bring private prosecutions is not abused.
The Government works closely with the RSPCA to ensure this country has the highest animal welfare standards. The RSPCA has played a crucial role as enforcers of animal welfare law for more than a hundred years, and the Government hopes that they will continue to do so in the future.
-
Indeed the evidence suggests the contrary: the RSPCA are successful in some 97% of cases they bring before the courts (2004). That is a very high success rate and clearly justifies the RSPCA's general approach.
having worked in an organisation with limited resources that has powers of prosecution, I know that the reason they have such a high success rate is because they only proceed with the cases where they have a very good chance of succeeding. The selection is on this basis, rather than that of who needs to be prosecuted.
-
Indeed the evidence suggests the contrary: the RSPCA are successful in some 97% of cases they bring before the courts (2004). That is a very high success rate and clearly justifies the RSPCA's general approach.
having worked in an organisation with limited resources that has powers of prosecution, I know that the reason they have such a high success rate is because they only proceed with the cases where they have a very good chance of succeeding. The selection is on this basis, rather than that of who needs to be prosecuted.
That was what I thought when I read it - its such a rubbish response that answers nothing. What about all the other calls they get and don't bother with? What about the people told the lost cat will "go away if you stop feeding it" etc etc...
Grrrrr >:(
-
What about the woman who was told to put a heavily pregnant queen back outside as "it will look after itself >:(
-
And the stray dog who "will find his own way home"
And the mum & newborns who didnt need shelter "as she will just take them home" >:(
-
Or Bertie's mum, the pregnant queen with hardly any fur or teeth (aged just two), who turned up on my friend's doorstep having escaped from the two-bedroom flat over the road that turned out to be "home" to 36 ginger cats ... apparently there was "no real evidence of abuse." >:(
-
Got that yesterday too Gill. Was beyond belief when I read it. The petition wasn't about what the Animal Welfare Act was going to do about the RSPCA's policies... which is what they turned it into. >:(