When veteran Alberta Conservative MP Myron Thompson rose in the House of Commons Feb. 19 to table one of the largest petitions in recent parliamentary history, he instantly became a prominent voice for the campaign to toughen cruelty-to-animal laws.
However, it turns out he was not speaking for the petitioners.
The petition carried 111,896 names and the impetus behind it was an incident of horrific dog mutilation in his Wild Rose riding.
“The petitioners urge Parliament to update our current laws with regard to animal welfare, in other words toughen up our current animal cruelty laws, and that it be known as the Daisy Duke bill in memory of a pup killed in my riding,” said Thompson.
Read Also
Canola oil transloading facility opens
DP World just opened its new canola oil transload facility at the Port of Vancouver. It can ship one million tonnes of the commodity per year.
It appeared to be a petition in support of Bill S-213, which if passed would increase penalties for conviction but not change definitions. Debate on the bill started Feb. 26, sponsored by New Brunswick Liberal Charles Hubbard.
It is the seventh attempt in the past eight years to update animal cruelty laws. All previous efforts failed to update the 114-year-old law.
However, that was not what the petitioners wanted Thompson to say. That was not why they had spent so much energy to collect names.
Back in Didsbury, Alta., the woman who spearheaded the petition campaign was seething.
“I’m very disappointed with the way it was presented and with Mr. Thompson’s performance on this,” Tamara Chaney said. “He did not do what we were told he would do. I really question his motive.”
The 30-year-old dog groomer opposes Bill S-213 as inadequate and worse than nothing.
The Canadian Federation of Humane Societies, which helped her gather names across the country, also is campaigning ferociously against the bill, arguing that if Parliament approves S-213, it will take the steam out of efforts to modernize animal cruelty rules that were written in 1892.
“Kill S-213,” the CHFS said in advertisements urging MPs to vote against it. “It’s the humane thing to do.”
Chaney and her allies compiled the petition to support another tougher and more far-reaching private member’s bill that has not yet come up for debate, Bill C-373 proposed by Toronto-area Liberal MP Mark Holland.
It reflects broadly supported legislation proposed by the last Liberal government. Even major agriculture groups had satisfied themselves that the wording of the bill would not jeopardize normal animal husbandry practices, a possibility that had made them suspicious of earlier versions of the bill.
“That is the bill this country needs,” said Shelagh MacDonald, program director for the national humane societies’ lobby. “Using the same wording and definitions from the 1890s but increasing penalties is just feeble 1892 legislation adjusted for inflation.”
The humane society said only one of every 400 animal cruelty complaints leads to a Criminal Code conviction.
“Bill S-213 will not change this,” the federation ad said.
It said tougher modern animal cruelty definitions and penalties are supported by 85 percent of Canadians “including hunters, anglers and farmers.”
During the Feb. 26 parliamentary debate, Thompson said any attempt to broaden the bill into new definitions would enmesh the issue in the debates over unintended consequences that likely would mean no changes would be made. Six previous attempts had floundered over those questions.
Only the NDP said it would oppose S-213 as inadequate, although some Liberals also support Holland’s bill and the Bloc Québecois said it would prefer to see the two bills combined.
Thompson said improvements could be proposed during committee hearings.
However, to defeat S-213 would be to say, “the status quo is good enough. The status quo is not good enough.”
A final vote is months away and the possibility of an early election could make this the seventh failed attempt.
