Critics of the SPCA have been saying for years that the animals and donors in this province need an independent third party to investigate complaints into the SPCA's policies and practices, including seizure and animal-welfare practices. Complaining to the SPCA about the SPCA has failed dismally to correct what are clear conflicts between what the SPCA says and claims and what it does. The most recent clear example of this is "The 56 Reasons" conflict between the SPCA's CEO's words and SPCA actions which can be read at http://animaladvocateswatchdog.com/cgi-bin/watchdog.pl/read/1500
It's my belief that if the SPCA honestly means its claims to 'openness, accountability, transparency, and ethical behaviour', that it should welcome a forum where its critics are heard, its side is heard, and the results posted on a website so that members of the BC public who have an interest in the welfare of animals can be kept informed.
AAS has performed that public service since 2000 when it created its website. In other words, AAS has tried to keep the public informed of relevant information pertaining to the operation and policies of the SPCA through its website. It has tried to encourage the SPCA to be transparent and forthcoming with the public on its own. Unfortunately, AAS had the threat of being sued for defamation hanging over its head beginning in 2001 and was finally sued by the SPCA for defamation in 2004. I believe that the lawsuit's purpose was to silence the AAS and the other defendants who have criticized it. It has threatened many others critic with defamation suits as well. There is clearly an unwillingness on the part of the SPCA to take criticism from animal welfarists. This may be because it perceives us as being bias and unable to be objective.
I believe that there is a solution that would be acceptable to the SPCA and its critics and that would ensure the SPCA is fulfilling its mandate to the best of its ability while being open, accountable, and transparent. The solution is the appointment of a neutral third party, by the Law Society or some other body, to the newly created position of "Complaints Officer". The Complaints Officer's job would be to receive complaints pertaining to the SPCA from employees, volunteers and management of the SPCA, from other animal welfarists and from the general public. When a complaint is submitted, the Complaints Officer would investigate the complaint and submit it to the SPCA for its response. Oral hearings may or may not be necessary. The Complaints Officer would then consider the evidence of the complainant and the SPCA (which evidence may or may not include supporting documentation such as vet letters or photos) and would then provide written reasons that would describe the nature of the complaint and the SPCA's response and make a conclusion as to whether or not, based on the evidence, there was merit in the complaint. The written reasons may include any steps taken by the SPCA to remedy the problem set out in the complaint and the Complaints Officer may also include recommendations to the complainant and the SPCA with respect to remedial measures. All written decisions would be posted on the internet so as to make the SPCA accountable and transparent, to provide important information to the public on a matter of public interest and to provide guidelines to the SPCA and others as to acceptable conduct and remedial measures to be taken in a variety of situations.
Read the SPCA's Mission, Vision, Guiding Principles and Charter
http://www.spca.bc.ca/about/default.asp
Principled behaviour:
We are open, honest and transparent in our relationships with our staff, volunteers, members, donors and the public. We treat each other and those we serve, including the animals, with integrity, respect and compassionate caring.
And the BC SPCA's Code of Ethics:
http://www.spca.bc.ca/about/BCSPCA_CodeOfEthics_July2005.PDF