The BBC has broadcast an investigation in which the RSPCA is accused of various acts of inappropriate and uncharitable behaviour towards a veterinary surgeon, a barrister, an aged pet owner and the owners of an animal sanctuary.
The accusations were broadcast on BBC Radio 4's Face the Facts, and included:
Responding to the accusations, RSPCA's Chief Executive Gavin Grant sounded by turns arrogant and defiant, dismissing accusations of harassment of vets and barristers as 'a nonsense' and saying that the idea that the police/CPS should take over prosecutions (as happens in Scotland) is 'fanciful'. When the interviewer suggested that the charity was losing its reputation as a 'helpful' organisation and becoming known as 'heavy-handed', Mr Grant seemed unapologetic, deflecting the question by talking about the values of those that founded the charity.
PS: Whilst you're here, take a moment to see our latest job opportunities for vets.
I listened to this programme when it was aired and the witnesses were very convincing. The only concession the Chief Executive made was that the RSPCA would "look at" the possible formation of an internal (not independent) scrutineering body.
It seems very much as though the RSPCA sees success as a prosecution and little else. I lost faith in them sometime ago having watched a lady suffer at their hands. She was fairly easy target. Her crime was that the rabbits weren't cleaned out and had no water - on 1 single day. Funnily enough , they were in good health until the RSPCA were looking after them.
I loathe the RSPCA, have done since I was a ministry vet and had experience of their cynical politicing. The new CEO (big title, big salary) is intent on a high profile political career (he's a failed MP having stood unsucessfully as a Lib Dem). His recent suing of the Heythrop Junt (cost to RSPCA £250,000) indicates how far this man is prepared to go the elevate his public profile. Nasty, nasty people, pity as some of the inspectors are really good caring people.
I have been in court as a professional witness for several of my clients accused by the RSPCA for mis-treating their animals.
I have been reported to the RCVS disciplinary committee by the RSPCA consequent to one of the court cases.
I wrote to the BVA for help and advice and with the help of John Parker managed to have a meeting organised for other members of the profession who had a grievence against the RSPCA.This meeting was held in July 2009.I have not heard much as a result of this meeting.
It seems that our concerns with the behaviour of the RSPCA has not abated indeed even the Archbishop of Canterbury has had his say.
Is it not now time for the BVA and RCVS to act for us and approach the RSPCA in a meaningful way?
I try and direct my clients benevolence towards the Blue Cross and other charities and definitely not the RSPCA .
I have read this article with interest and would like to add a different perspective. The Animal Welfare Act 2006 means owners have a legal responsibility to meet the welfare needs of their animals. There are approximately 24 million owned pets in the UK. In 2009 there were approximately 2500 convictions under the AWA. Does this mean the remaining 24 997 500 pets have adequate welfare? Or does it mean we have just scratched the surface? Likely there are many, many animals suffering cruelty and neglect, who will not receive any help and many of these will die as a result of their poor welfare.
The RSPCA cruelty and advice line receives over one million calls every year, and the majority of investigations carried out by the RSPCA are a result of these calls by the public about mistreated, neglected, injured or distressed animals. In 2009 75000 welfare improvement notices were handed out to owners not meeting the welfare needs of their animals, an opportunity, a chance to do things better. The stories in this article are very ‘he said she said’. In my experience working for the society, the rehoming centres are often full and overflowing. The finite resources of the inspectorate mean they cannot attend all the calls made. Knowing this, I feel very strongly that if animals are removed from a property it is for one reason only – because they are suffering poor welfare. If there are a lot of inspectors then it is because there are a so many animals involved. If action is rapid it is because animals are dying.
I agree the police should be more involved. Their skill would help uncover the reality for these animals, and I have no doubt it would strengthen the prosecution in the majority of cases.
Surprise surprise, so many individuals accused or prosecuted deny any wrong doing. And we would like to believe them, animal suffering is not a nice thing. But it is real, animals are suffering, to deny and ignore this would be immoral and unethical, and for us vets, unprofessional.
Over the last 20 years my dealings with the RSPCA have been entirely amicable and the local inspectors have behaved very well and have always looked at the needs for education before prosecuting. I have NOT seen them to be heavy handed and vindictive. Like any person trying to do their job I would understand their wish to see a case prosecuted successfully, and that this may then start to antagonise those on the receiving end of an investigation. There is a constant, though, hopefully intermittent, need for vets and RSPCA inspectors to communicate effectively and, with the requirements for client confidentiality, this can be a challenge to achieve satisfactorily for both sides. One thing that may have led to these different experiences around the country is the branch structure that, in my opinion, could lead to varying degrees of focus on some issues over others, e.g. hunting, dog fighting, poor ownership, puppy farming will have different priorities over the whole country. At the end of the day both the RSPCA and vets are out to improve animal welfare, and it will be better for us to face that challenge as allies and not as adversaries. I hope that these recent events highlight the need for us all to communicate as well as possible.
I've certainly felt bullied by an RS inspector in the past, and had words put in my mouth. Hopefully this accustion will steer the RS to update their policies.