Home

What we want

A dog is called a man's best friend. But in parts of our societies were people can least afford to fight back, our government is forcing its way into people's home and takes their dogs away from them. This isn't because the dog is dangerous. It is just unregistered. After seven days the dog will be killed, if the family doesn't pay up.

These things do not happen in Helen Clark's neighbourhood. These assaults happen in our areas which score lowest on the socio-economic scale. It is in those areas that they see the pound vehicles driving everyday and where the dogs have to hidden from view.

This has to change. And these are the things we want to achieve by giving publicity to this practice:

  1. A return of the respect for private property, be it a home or a dog. We once enjoyed such freedoms that it could be said that even in the poorest cottage the King of England could not enter without permission. But now dog control officers force their way on private property and into the home of dog owners to seize their dogs. Unless the dog is an immediate menace such police state tactics are completely unwarranted.
  2. We want local councils to:
    1. Order an immediate halt of the practice of taking dogs away from families just because they are unregistered. No dog can be taken away from a family just because it is unregistered.
    2. Order an immediate halt of the killing of dogs that are taken because the owner cannot afford to pay the fine.
    3. Order an immediate return of taken dogs to their owners unless the dog has been judged dangerous in court. Not judged dangerous by companies who have a financial interest in killing dogs.
    4. Payment of full compensation to the dog owner for all past and current cases when their dog in custody of the council has attracted any diseases and where medical costs were made or the dog has died from the disease.
    5. A full and final rejection of any schemes where poor dog owners do not have to pay registration cost. Either dog registration should be scrapped for all, so none have to pay, or all dog owners have to pay the same amount. Forcing non dog owners to pay for dog owners is another implicit tax and will only antagonize non-dog-owners. Dog registration should not become another wealth transfer scheme.
    6. An immediate withdrawal of the powers granted to companies who do not comply with the criteria mentioned in the next head.
  3. Any agency, council or commercial, which is employed to enforce the law must adhere to the following criteria:
    1. Offer payment schemes that are accepted practice in every other businesses. In particular:
      • Paying the registration fee in reasonable instalments.
      • Paying fines in reasonable instalments.
      • Payment in advance, for multiple years if necessary.
    2. Have procedures that treat dog owners with respect.
    3. Have a proper complaint investigation procedure.
    4. It should be as easy as possible for dog owners to get their dogs returned. Practices like having neighbours identify dogs serve no discernible purpose.
  4. Honest and complete statistics for 2006: The companies employed by the council to enforce dog control should release the following statistics for the year 2006:
    • The number of complaints about dogs received per month.
    • The number of dogs taken from their owners because of such complaints.
    • The number of dogs taken every month simply because they are not registered.
    • The number of dogs killed because their owners cannot afford the registration fee and the hefty fines.
    • The amount of dollars received per taken dog.
    • The amount of dollars received per killed dog.
  5. A parliamentary inquiry into the effects of the Dog Control Amendment Act 2003: was the cure worse than the disease?
    Last year it was claimed in parliament that dog attacks were up by 38 percent. A clear indication this law has improved nothing. There are two things that must happen will we see an improvement of outcomes:
    1. Companies tasked with enforcement must have the right incentives: the current incentives favour targeting good-mannered dogs from poor people.
    2. More dog owners must become responsible. That is hard work. A law will not change behaviour. If that was true, drug use, smoking and gambling would .disappear overnight.

    We want parliament to look carefully into the stories raised on this web site and decide for themselves if this is what they want to happen in New Zealand. Can poor people own dogs or is that just for the rich?