http://tinyurl.com/5jbh4j
Romina Maurino
THE CANADIAN PRESS

Changes to Ontario's animal cruelty laws risk giving too much unchecked power to protection agencies and causing problems for farmers trying to do their jobs, critics charged today.

Under a bill passed by the Ontario legislature Monday, people who abuse animals will face jail, stiffer fines and a lifetime ban on animal ownership. The act also creates exemptions for wildlife, agriculture and veterinary practices.

But Progressive Conservative Randy Hillier said the bill gives police powers to animal welfare officers with no oversight or accountability, and he's worried that will lead to abuses as well as problems for farmers.

"The (Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) enforcement officers only require two weeks of training before they get police powers, and to understand animal husbandry and livestock care takes far greater than two weeks," said Hillier, who represents Lanark-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington.

"To convey all this authority onto a novice with two weeks of police training, and take away any political accountability – we're just asking for trouble."

Former Conservative Bill Murdoch, now sitting as an Independent for the farming community of Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound, said he's not comforted by the exclusion of standard farm practices from the Animal Protection Act because city people don't always understand what farm work entails.

"It says on the bill you can't cause distress to an animal. Well, you know, sometimes the farming things we have to do might cause a bit of distress, and somebody from the city wouldn't even understand that," Murdoch said.

"I've heard some of the vets get complaints from people that drive up from the city because the cattle are standing outside in the rain or in the snow, (saying) those animals should be inside. Nowadays, cattle live outside all winter."

The government has boasted the overhaul of the 90-year-old Animal Protection Act would bring the province from "worst to first" after it was criticized for having the most lax animal protection laws in the country.

Key changes include making it an offence to cause or permit distress to an animal, allowing the OSPCA to inspect places where animals are kept for entertainment, exhibition, boarding, sale or hire, and requiring veterinarians to report suspected abuse and neglect.

Pat Tohill, programs manager at the World Society for the Protection of Animals, praised the stiffer penalties and new care standards, but said his group had hoped to see improved regulations on licensing zoos.

"There's certainly some positive benefits for zoo animals," Tohill said.

"But we maintain that without licensing to attach the standards of care to, any kind of prevention of animal cruelty act is a pretty blunt instrument for addressing care in a zoo situation."

NDP critic Cheri DiNovo said she still has questions about the transparency of the Ontario SPCA and the way it spends taxpayer money.

"They get taxpayer dollars – $6.1 million, in effect – so we think they should either come under the ombudsman's oversight or they should be open to freedom of information requests, neither of which is the case right now," DiNovo said.

But she added her party supported the bill, which passed on a voice vote in the legislature, because it's at least a step in the right direction.

"It's an inch forward for animal welfare where we need a yard, but an inch is better than nothing," she said.