This might be of interest to those that feel that the SPCA is not adequately upholding the PCA Act..

Official Report of DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (Hansard)
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 13, 1994
Afternoon Sitting
Volume 14, Number 3

PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS AMENDMENT ACT, 1994

http://www.legis.gov.bc.ca/1994/hansard/h0413pm.htm

"....Like I said, I will give tentative support in second reading. There are a few items that need clarification by the minister, such as the definition of cruelty. What does cruelty mean to you and to me? We want to hear what the minister thinks about that, considering it is not defined in the bill. It could be an area of contention. Another area we want clarification on is: what is critical distress, and how do you judge it? Veterinarians are having problems with these terminologies. We'd like to hear the minister's point of view on this so we'll have it on the record, and people will know where they stand. Another area is the powers of the authorized agent, or special constable. What training is the SPCA going to have to make sure that it's standardized? What standards do the special constables adhere to when they go out on a task? We would like to hear just what the standards will be. It's not talked about in the bill now. There is another area that the minister should take a look at, and we will be discussing it in committee stage. What is meant by reasonable and generally accepted practice? We're talking about farm animals. That terminology should be clarified for the opposition before this bill is passed.

[ Page 9952 ]

We will be canvassing these issues in committee stage in order to hear the minister's point of view. We'll be debating it at that time, but we are tentatively supporting this bill."

Does anyone know if these issues were addressed and if the committee findings were made public?