Editorial: Logic off the leash
Microchipping of dogs is dumb, dumb, dumb.
No reasonable argument has been made that this will lessen the risk of dog attacks, and if anything it will increase it because fewer people will be inclined to register their animals.
That's what I've been saying for the past few posts!! I guess people have been reading what I've been saying, and agreeing. And who said that the Internet isn't powerful :)
The politicians and the public were slow to realise the implications of microchipping part of the Dog Control Amendment Bill when it was passed in 2004.
Funnily enough, during the elction campaign, DOGLINKS was the only one asking about microchipping, and asking the view of political parties (and posted them). During one of the political meetings, I was refused to ask my question !!!
Only ACT voted against the bill then, and while other parties had disquiet over the microchipping part, they did not want to risk derailing the whole law in an emotive post-Carolina Anderson era after the girl was mauled by a dog.
(...) Even the supporters of the law – the SPCA, veterinarians and kennel clubs – are subdued.
So why don't the politicians back down, recognise this part of the Dog Control Act for what it is, swallow some pride and drop it?
Today there is almost enough support to do just that. National, ACT, the Greens and the Maori Party want microchipping dropped. United Future will support an exemption for farm dogs only. The Greens won't wear that. For them, it's all or nothing. So, close, but no cigar. Frustratingly enough, if microchipping alone went to a conscience vote, it would most likely pass.
So, unless United Future can be swayed the rest of the way (unlikely), IDIOTS, who voted for 'em?? They only have 1% of the vote!! or New Zealand First they have 3% of the vote or Labour be so persuaded (more unlikely), it looks like we're going to have confirmed an element of law that most politicians and a great part of the community think is stupid.
Should that happen the onus falls on local government to enforce it. Now, far from us as a responsible newspaper to advocate civil disobedience, but who is really being irresponsible here? And for what? Stubbornness? Pride? We give up. We can't think of anything else.
Why should we be surprised... there are many laws out there that the public don't support but who are too afraid to say so for appearing 'not with it'. It takes DOGS and CHIPS to see it.
________________________________________
Horowhenua opposes microchips
Horowhenua District Council has come out in support of the opponents of dog microchipping.
Environment manager Tony Thomas says the council has voted in favour of a full exemption.
"There is nothing more that can be added at this stage," he said. "It was just a policy statement by the council." However, Palmerston North City Council plans to fully comply with the microchipping legislation.
________________________________________
Microchip opponents can't muster majority
Number-crunching opponents of mandatory microchipping of dogs are still trying to muster a majority in Parliament to defeat the law but their campaign appears to be doomed.
All newly registered dogs have to be microchipped under a provision that comes into force on July 1, and MPs who want to stop it have drafted amendments to a local government bill which is going through Parliament.
No reasonable argument has been made that this will lessen the risk of dog attacks, and if anything it will increase it because fewer people will be inclined to register their animals.
That's what I've been saying for the past few posts!! I guess people have been reading what I've been saying, and agreeing. And who said that the Internet isn't powerful :)
The politicians and the public were slow to realise the implications of microchipping part of the Dog Control Amendment Bill when it was passed in 2004.
Funnily enough, during the elction campaign, DOGLINKS was the only one asking about microchipping, and asking the view of political parties (and posted them). During one of the political meetings, I was refused to ask my question !!!
Only ACT voted against the bill then, and while other parties had disquiet over the microchipping part, they did not want to risk derailing the whole law in an emotive post-Carolina Anderson era after the girl was mauled by a dog.
(...) Even the supporters of the law – the SPCA, veterinarians and kennel clubs – are subdued.
So why don't the politicians back down, recognise this part of the Dog Control Act for what it is, swallow some pride and drop it?
Today there is almost enough support to do just that. National, ACT, the Greens and the Maori Party want microchipping dropped. United Future will support an exemption for farm dogs only. The Greens won't wear that. For them, it's all or nothing. So, close, but no cigar. Frustratingly enough, if microchipping alone went to a conscience vote, it would most likely pass.
So, unless United Future can be swayed the rest of the way (unlikely), IDIOTS, who voted for 'em?? They only have 1% of the vote!! or New Zealand First they have 3% of the vote or Labour be so persuaded (more unlikely), it looks like we're going to have confirmed an element of law that most politicians and a great part of the community think is stupid.
Should that happen the onus falls on local government to enforce it. Now, far from us as a responsible newspaper to advocate civil disobedience, but who is really being irresponsible here? And for what? Stubbornness? Pride? We give up. We can't think of anything else.
Why should we be surprised... there are many laws out there that the public don't support but who are too afraid to say so for appearing 'not with it'. It takes DOGS and CHIPS to see it.
________________________________________
Horowhenua opposes microchips
Horowhenua District Council has come out in support of the opponents of dog microchipping.
Environment manager Tony Thomas says the council has voted in favour of a full exemption.
"There is nothing more that can be added at this stage," he said. "It was just a policy statement by the council." However, Palmerston North City Council plans to fully comply with the microchipping legislation.
________________________________________
Microchip opponents can't muster majority
Number-crunching opponents of mandatory microchipping of dogs are still trying to muster a majority in Parliament to defeat the law but their campaign appears to be doomed.
All newly registered dogs have to be microchipped under a provision that comes into force on July 1, and MPs who want to stop it have drafted amendments to a local government bill which is going through Parliament.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home