The Animal Welfare Amendment Bill is currently being considered by the Primary Production Committee, with view of reporting back to parliament or before 30 April 2010.
I made a submission to this bill pointing out that we currently had organisations such as AWINZ ( which is a legal fiction ) administering the Bill. But my submission was too embarrasing to them (because it pointed out the lack of independence of their independent advisor) and was thrown out.
The other approved organisation is the RNZSPCA but just exactly who or what is the RNZSPCA
I have a very serious issue with regards to what an approved organisation is and how simple it is to become one,apparently just by knowing the right people and without involvement of MAF or the minister.
First we have to understand what an approved Organisation is
An approved organisation – means an organisation declared, under section 121, to be an approved organisation for the purposes of this Act( animal welfare Act)
The act by section 189 provides for transitional provisions and states “The organisation known as the Royal New Zealand Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Incorporated is an approved organisation for the purposes of this Act.”
The act does not define the RNZSPCA but Section 190 of the animal welfare act states “Any incorporated society that is a branch or member of the Royal New Zealand Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Incorporated may, through that royal society (in its capacity as an approved organisation) recommend persons—
- (a) for appointment under section 124 as inspectors; or
- (b) for appointment under section 125 as auxiliary officers.”
It is interesting that this is in the act when in the discussion papers of the select committee at the time of considering the animal welfare act they said this ..
“ We have some concern that SPCA member societies are not directly accountable to the national body ( unlike branches ) this means that there is no direct line of accountability from member societies to the crown. The bill addresses this to some extent by requiring that inspectors of member societies can be appointed only under the recommendation of the RNZSPCA. Further member societies will only continue to be deemed” approved “ organisations under the act if they continue to be affiliated with the RNZSPCA and while the RNZSPCA itself remains an approved Organisation . we accept that to go further and require affiliated societies to merge with the RNZSPCA would not be appropriate. “
In the document written by Neil Wells and used as a training manual for inspectors he states “ Inspectors have considerable coercive powers, and it is important that such powers are exercised in an impartial and informed way. In deciding whether to recognise an organisation the bill provides that the minister must be satisfied that an organisation meets specific criteria ……”
There are two wasy to become an approved organisation
1. Through application to the minister Like AWINZ did and succeeded despite not existing in reality
Or 2 by being affiliated or a branch of the RNZSPCA.
But who is affiliated and who is a branch.. Look at the RNZSPCA web site and they all appear as Branches but they are not all branches many are SPCA’s and according to the official sources as quoted above are not directly accountable to the RNZSPCA .
And why does the RNZSPCA call itself SPCA and its branches SPCA branches ? is it because it is trying to look like one organisation when in reality it is a whole group of societies .
If there is a document which combines the societies why is it not publicly available, when was it signed who were the parties to it , how do societies become affiliated? How are new ones set up can any one start a new SPCA ?
Can you change your name and become an SPCA and become an approved organisation through back door , it would appear so
In 1999 when AWINZ( a trading name ) applied in that name to become an approved Organisation and succeeded without proof that the organisation actually exists, there was another organisation which also applied , it at least was an incorporated society this was the INTERNATIONAL LEAGUE FOR THE PROTECTION OF HORSES (NEW ZEALAND) INCORPORATED
I believe it now It now has its own inspectors , and attained this through a simple change of name on 11-NOV-2008 when it became the SPCA AUCKLAND HORSE WELFARE AUXILIARY INCORPORATED . It apparently comes under the umbrella of the e SPCA Auckland which is a member society of the RNZSPCA , but the RNZSPCA uses the logo which it has trademarked being SPCA.
Will this mean that any group changing its name to SPCA and affiliating with the RNZSPCA can employ its own animal welfare inspectors who in turn can use the wide sweeping powers that the animal welfare act gives them so that they can prosecute people for strict liability offences and collect the money for doing so paying up will be cheaper than trying to defend it .
Is this a possibility for the likes of dog contractors to Auckland city council to become member societies of the SPCA and be appointed inspectors under the act?
Looks like a good money making venture to me. section 171 allows for the penalties to be paid to the organisation which prosecuted now we are calling for greater penalties, which is not something I oppose but before we increase penalties we have to ensure that the structure and integrity is there, we are setting up a law enforcement service with very little accountability .
Is law enforcements as a primary duty of the RNZSPCA , its member societies and branches in the best interest of the relationship between people and animals?
Do we need to prosecute those who through poverty ,illness or lack of intent neglect their animals… those people need help not fines… see the example of what happened in Britain recently
Where was the SPCA when people brought their attention to animals which were suffering ? seehttp://www.4thehorse.net.nz/ and the issue where Waikato branch had failed to address dying animals
There is such a thing as economy in law enforcement, where it is cheaper to pay up than to defend the matter will this be practiced by the RNZSPCA., branches and SPCA’s ? Got to be a better fundraiser than cold calling.
And where is the accountability ????? It would appear approved organisations can grow disproportionately all without any in put and control of central government.
[…] member societies , the agreements between these bodies are not of public record and it appears from the recent example that the back door to appointment of Inspectors is wide […]
Pingback by Select committee and press appear to be in the dark about the reality of animal welfare « Anticorruptionnz's Blog — 02/05/2010 @ 3:37 am
[…] Because of the overlap with the RNZSPCA and involvement with Neil Wells with the Waikato SPCA trust I asked questions of the RNZSPCA and the SPCA which still appear to be operating under the transitional part of the act and appear to be taking on approved organisations through the back door. […]
Pingback by Update for the ombudsmen AWINZ SPCA will you investigate? « Anticorruptionnz's Blog — 18/09/2010 @ 9:54 am
[…] Because of the overlap with the RNZSPCA and involvement with Neil Wells with the Waikato SPCA trust I asked questions of the RNZSPCA and the SPCA which still appear to be operating under the transitional part of the act and appear to be taking on approved organisations through the back door. […]
Pingback by Update AWINZ SPCA « Anticorruptionnz's Blog — 18/09/2010 @ 9:59 am