I'm not getting into anymore arguments, but I would like to clarify a few points. The most important is that I must hold my hands up to one mistake - about the right of entry. The RSPCA have no automatic right of entry, but the police rarely refuse to attend if any animal is in genuine distress, so in some circles, it is considered a "right". My apologies.
1. "Is it untrue that the RSPCA have stated that they will only accept "RSPCA generated" animals in future? Or was that just a way of trying to imply it was untrue without actually stating so?". I did not say that this was untrue nor did I imply that it was untrue - I just said WHY this was likely to be the case.
2. ALL RSPCA Inspectors (note - Inspectors, not AWA's or AWO's) are employed by the RSPCA who is an independent charity and therefore the Inspectors are not council officials.
3. "Well without a charities ombudsman even the charity commission admit there is nowhere other than the massively expensive legal route for people who feel aggrieved.". As I said - I agree with you on this point, but should those who give their money to charity be forced to pay for another Government-funded Quango? We pay enough taxes as it is.
4. "And no, I can't say how much the new RSPCA chief executive will be paid - the RSPCA have not told anyone yet!" - Funnily enough I don't know either. I completely disagree with the CEO being paid lots of money, as are nearly all CEO's of any major association.
5. "being ordered ordered to kill their animals" The RSPCA (as an organisation) do not order the inspectors to kill animals, nor do they tell people to kill their animals. The only exception to this rule is a dog under the DDA - and this situation would also have to apply for the Police if they came across a dog under the DDA; also any animal that has been injured to the point of it not being able to survive, then it is the kindest thing to do.
Many may not be aware but during the summer, the Government banned the RSPCA (or any other animal rescue organisation) from using a drug that is used to humanely PTS an animal in distress, for any wildlife. This meant that the Inspectors had to use alternative (humane) methods to releive suffering for terminally injured wildlife by trained officers; or face the extra time and costs involved in taking the animal/s to the vet for more humane end. This has since been rescinded.
6. "Approaching the RSPCA for information or to complain is a total waste of time." - Have I offered you the chance to put your situation and comments forward? Yes. And I would make sure that you received an answer. Our council is made up of volunteers from different branches and we in no way "bow down" to the RSPCA society. Yes there are guidelines, but any genuine complaint or request for public information will be treated with respect and a full response given.
Finally - Fenris. You state that you have "no time" to introduce yourself, yet you found the time to jump on this forum and post some very long comments (including links which must have taken time to find), as well, IMHO, a personal attack against me and my beliefs, yet you do not know me - why?
Well done for finding a home for the dog & cat btw - that is a really good thing to do - and that comment is in no way meant in any way other than genuine thanks and relief that these two animals have found a loving new home.
In the past 12 months, I have been involved directly with the re-homing of over 200 animals (dogs, cats, rabbits and rats) and indirectly involved with many more.
As my committee role is very important to me, and I beleive that at a local level, I can make a difference, however small. Every small step leads to a long journey.
And fenris - I am not "hurling insults" any more than you are - I was just making a point. I do not belive in personal insults on a public forum, as stated earlier, but feel that there must be 2 sides to every debate. Please can we just put this matter to one side with both parties having valid points, and both knowing that there is very little we as individuals can do to change the "powers that be" at the top - no matter how much we try.
Louise - thanks and I'm sorry to hear about the incident with the Inspector. As I guess this was with the SPCA, there are some minor differences because of Scottish Law - but not being an expert in either I would hate to even comment, but I agree that they whole animal welfare system does need a really good shake up.
Anyway that , from me anyway, is all for now on this subject. I hope that it will be closed for now. Fenris, (and everyone else), I personally wish you a great Christmas and a Happy New Year.
_________________
|