As principal solicitor for law firm Lawyers for Companion Animals, I have concerns about the composition of the companion animals taskforce.
The taskforce has denied repeated requests to have representation on it by community rescue groups.
In the United States, on the Dallas task force, more than 50per cent of the people on it are, or have previously been, part of community rescue groups.
Most of the members on the state government’s taskforce have not implemented meaningful solutions to reduce the kill rate of our companion animals. In this effort grassroots rescue organisations are leading the way.
What is of even more concern is that the taskforce failed to support Clover Moore’s inquiry into companion animals, which would have allowed an open inquiry into the issues causing high companion-animal euthanasia.
Why is the chairman of the taskforce repeatedly defending the actions of the NSW RSPCA, which uses a temperament test that results in the death thousands of dogs a year because of ‘‘behavioural issues’’?
Why is the RSPCA repeatedly rejecting offers from rescue groups to assist them?
Why did the RSPCA NSW not proactively bring the issue of high kill rate of companion animals to the public’s attention, instead of quietly killing companion animals, while at the same time accepting donations and bequests to protect and care for them?