Toronto Star
May 18, 2004. 01:00 AM
Editorial: Shameful inaction on animal cruelty
When Parliament recessed last week, it forfeited another glorious
opportunity to approve much-needed legislation that would update Canada's
cruelty-to-animals law, which is 112 years old and woefully inadequate.
The blame for this inaction rests squarely on the shoulders of
unelected senators, who have blocked, revised, and did everything in their
power over the past four years to prevent this bill from becoming law.
The proposed changes would move animals out of the section of the
Criminal Code that deals with property and would acknowledge them as
sentient beings that feel pain. Maximum penalties for animal cruelty would
increase from a $2,000 fine and six months' imprisonment to a $10,000 fine,
a five-year sentence and a lifetime ban on owning animals.
These are welcome and necessary amendments. Our 21st-century society
should not be saddled with a Victorian-era law that is lenient with people
who abuse animals. So why won't Ottawa do the right thing?
Parliament has been considering this issue since the Liberal
government introduced a bill in 1999. Repeatedly, the bill and its
subsequent incarnations have died on the order paper. Again, its days are
numbered.
The bill is stalled in the Senate after passing the House of Commons
in March. Senators sent the bill to their legal affairs committee last month
for study. But the committee didn't even bother to put the bill on the
agenda for its final meeting last Wednesday, effectively dooming it because
once an election is called, all unpassed legislation dies.
Senators are scheduled to resume sitting next Tuesday after the long
weekend. That likely won't happen because Prime Minister Paul Martin is
expected to call an election before then, which will dissolve Parliament.
Unless Martin delays an election, cracks the whip and tells the 66
Liberals in the 105-seat chamber to ram the legislation through next week,
Canadians must wait even longer for tougher animal-welfare laws.
This bill has the enthusiastic backing of the Canadian Federation of
Humane Societies, which represents more than 100 groups across the country.
It has won the approval of farmers, hunters, anglers and researchers who
raised earlier concerns. MPs from all parties voted in favour of it.
But the Senate's foot-dragging means an animal-protection bill will
have to start from scratch in the next Parliament. That's a shame.
Senators have been known to act sensibly and expeditiously. For
instance, they took only a matter of days to whisk the government's
centrepiece legislation on low-cost AIDS drugs for Africa on to royal
assent.
In the coming campaign, voters should ask: How can senators -
political appointees, not elected officials - hold up legislation that is
clearly in the public interest? It's an insult to the parliamentary process.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Footnote:
I will attempt to keep the web page up to date regarding any future
developments but will not be sending out any more email alerts due to time
constraints.
The entire history of the journey of the legislation is on the web
page. It was only intended to be short-lived page to help galvanized and
facilitate information sharing and strategize campaigns to pressure the
government to act on behalf of passing this bill as far as we could take it.
Well they did. We won it that. The fact that the Senate is beyond the reach
of the electoral government is a serious flaw in our constitution but not an
issue this organization is in a position to tackle. That would require a
re-write of our legislative process.
Never before, has any thing (big or small, local or national) brought
animal concerns to the attention of the average Canadian -- and to the
elected officials.
A small thing to remember: in the beginning, the Alliance and Tory
parties both said our laws were "just fine" ... However, within a year of
constant pressure, they did an about face. They realized that Canadians--
ALL Canadians, REGARDLESS of their party affiliations, wanted to see change
and pressured their respective parties that change, is indeed, necessary.
By mid-way in the struggle virtually NO MP could publicly say that there is
nothing wrong with our animal cruelty laws. What they descended into
bickering about was the nature and scope of the change-- but they could not
say that change was not necessary. That was a major battle that we won...
don't forget that. Just because they voted against the bill doesn't mean
that they ignored their constituents who wanted to see change. This bill
was passed INTACT by the House of Commons 3 TIMES!
Change will come, people want it. This bill may never see Royal Assent
BUT, millions of Canadians, who never gave animals, or the laws regarding
them, a second thought are now deeply concerned and good WILL come out of
this as long as we don't focus on the loss but, instead, exploit our
momentum to seek change in many, many other important ways.
I guess what I am saying is, people SHOULD stay involved in working
for change for animals in Canada. But, we should seriously consider
focusing our energy into what will garner the most good. Obviously, the
Senate is impervious to our pressure. It is up to each and every one of us
to sit back and take stock of where we feel that our new-found awareness and
efforts can actually be fruitful. There are many, many ways to do that.
Bill 22 is groundbreaking in many respects but hardly the answer to the
brutality and abuse that goes on every minute of every single day, in the
various animal-use industries. Bill C22 would not have helped those
animals. It was targeted only to those isolated cases that fell OUTSIDE
"normal business practices" and as such could do nothing to help lab
animals, factory farmed animals, animals in "entertainment", I.e. rodeos,
animals in recreation, tourism and wildlife in general.
The whole host of "stakeholders" who finally agreed to the bill did so
because they were assured that they could go on doing what they were doing
with impunity. It would be 'business as usual'. I confess that I was
shocked when I realized how dependant our economy is on the exploitation of
animals-The industries and relating industries are literally the basis of
our economy when they are all lined up together. These animals are seen,
not as living creatures but "assets", like bank notes or the manufactures of
assembly line products. They are legally disposable. And the way the
government deals with so-called nuisance animals is nothing short of
genocide. Imprisoning the "Ted Bundy's" of animal cruelty is hardly going
to change institutionalized animal abuse in Canada. It will only pacify the
electorate that we are "good to our animals" and that they get "justice"
when they are wronged. If justice would every be served to an abused animal
it would-far and away- be the exception... the gross, exception.
There is so much government sanctioned abuse taking place that one can
pick from a myriad of travesties address.
We have a lot to do.
Please don't stop caring or walk away defeated. This is really just
the beginning.
A. Gibson
Toronto Coalition for Anticruelty Legislation