The RSPCA relies on donations from the animal loving public. What sort of RSPCA do they want? I am sure they want an organisation that has a direct involvement in animal welfare, which means a hands-on operation that saves the lives of animals, rehomes companion animals and which treats injured animals. So, what have the generous British public got? A political organisation run by a person who has a background in politics and public relations.
Not only is the chief executive of the RSPCA, Gavin Grant, a person who tried twice to be elected as a Lib Dem Member of Parliament, he has been chairman of the PR agency Burson-Marsteller, which did work for AstraZeneca, Unilever and GlaxoSmithKline, companies known for being involved in animal testing. This is not a great CV for a man charged with improving the lives and saving the lives of animals.
Talking about saving lives, was Mr Grant behind the acknowledged unnecessary slaughter of 40 sheep at Ramsgate not long ago? It was a PR exercise that went badly wrong. It was an awful mess. Forty sheep were offloaded from a lorry at Ramsgate docks and killed by the RSPCA with a bolt gun because they were all declared lame. There was blood everywhere. If used properly, bolt guns should not produce lots of blood. The bloody massacre was photographed and the photo used in a PR exercise against shipping animals. Very odd. Blood looks good in a photo that demands impact. The sheep shouldn’t have been killed anyway.
Other disturbing information about modern RSPCA is:
My personal experience of trying to get the RSPCA to turn up and assist a fox in dire need proved fruitless until others called and appeared to have put some heat on them. This reflects what I see as going on; a winding down of direct assistance to animals in need and a ramping up of lobbying and large campaigns.
I have very strong feelings that the individual people who fund the RSCPA (founded in 1834), often through large legacies in their wills, really want to see this venerable organization directly involved in the welfare of animals. It should be a hands-on, on the ground charity which is less involved in campaigns and high profile fancy promotions etc.
In doing that, the organisation will get all the good publicity it needs and do well in years to come. They have the wrong leader for that task, in my opinion. The person in charge should be a dyed-in-the-wool animal loving person with a CV that shouts: I love animals. I think Ruth and Babz together would be fine 😉
Photo by didbygraham (creative commons on Flickr)
NEWS AND COMMENT - PERTH: A peeved and frankly angry Australian man, Craig Turner, built…
We know that we don't truly own our domestic cat companions. We might think that…
Below is a stitched together narrative from many Twitter tweets in Russian (translated by Google)…