Wednesday, 31 March 2010

RSPCA Dog Licence will spend your money chasing bad legislation.

The RSPCA have today announced their wish to see a return of the failed dog licence. I was going to blog about this last night ready for 12.01am but was overcome with a fit of hysterical laughter so apologies for the delay. What made me giggle so much were the notes at the bottom of their release that give the figures on which they base their assumption. We have an estimated 10 million dogs in the UK.

The RSPCA survey asked 1,017 adults between the ages of 16-64 in Great Britain in February 2010, only 334 were dog owners.

Hardly earth shatteringly wonderful and worthy of all the hype is it?

What the RSPCA are claiming is that the return of a dog licence “would be hugely beneficial in addressing many animal welfare concerns stemming from overbreeding of dogs to a lack of traceable ownership.”
How?! Even with 100 percent compliance we are still not tackling the issues.

Being able to pay £20 or even £50 a year for a licence to help enforce our terrible canine legislation will not prevent anything. It won’t suddenly lead to me knowing all I need to know about dog ownership. I probably paid much more than that to own my dog so what does a few quid mean? Will paying that money mean my dog will not misbehave? Nope. Will paying that money mean I will source a better breeder next time I want a dog? Nope. It won’t stop back yard breeders…they already need a licence and we all know that means nothing!

The suggestion of 3rd party liability caused uproar and that actually had some use. A licence fee such as the RSPCA are proposing really is a dog tax, make no mistake on that.

Northern Ireland have had the dog licence for years so in theory should be way ahead of the rest of the UK in regards to animal welfare and stray dogs…yet their stray problem is the biggest in the UK with more dogs being destroyed there than the rest of the UK and Northern Ireland has a huge overbreeding/ puppy farming issue.

The suggestion from the RSPCA is that the money generated would be helpful. I have a question tho….

If money to improve things is so important, where are the RSPCA DEMANDS that Breed Specifc Legislation be repealed via Defras Consultation?

If money is needed surely this will be the first step for the organisation that claims it is anti BSL. The Met police alone have got an extra 1.5 million pounds added to their annual budget for dealing with so called “dangerous dogs” the huge majority of which are taken not because of their behaviour but because of their looks.

If money is needed lets repeal that first but the RSPCA have said NOTHING on it since the consultation began and instead ask you to pay for something that wont make any improvement on our current situation while allowing the mindless slaughter of dogs who have done nothing wrong.

I am sick of dead dogs. I am sick of hearing of dog incidents and thinking “this could so easily have been avoided” and I am sick of  the Government and various other organisations refusal to do anything to improve matters because they are more worried about their image.

There’s a wonderful slogan on the net. It says “You listened to a rumour and then you passed a lie, because of your ignorance I had to die”. Remember this if the RSPCA get their licence fee the next time a child is hurt or killed or a dog is killed because of how it looks.

1 comment:

  1. I quite agree. Asking dog owners to pay money for a licence or for insurance is just a way of taxing them. It does nothing to solve the problems.