|
Your letters
SPCA:
What scandal?
From J
Micallef, SPCA PRO
It was the British poet, Humbert Wolfe who wrote the scathing
lines:
You cannot
hope/to bribe or twist,
thank God! The/British journalist.
But, seeing what/The man will do
Unbribed, there's/ No occasion to.
I was reminded
of this by Miriam Dunn's contribution to your newspaper, last
Sunday. SPCA embroiled in yet another scandal,. What scandal,
I thought? The scandal turned out to be no scandal at all, but
the measure taken by the SPCA Committee, with legal advice, to
remove Ms Shephard as executive secretary and committee member
of the SPCA.
What was
disturbing about the report was not so much what Ms Dunn had to
say, much of which was incorrect but that given the fact that
she was writing a report about a 'scandal', she did not even presume
to contact anybody at the SPCA to see if the Society could possibly
have anything to say on the matter. I thought this was de rigeur
for any responsible reporter wishing to properly inform readers.
Your reporter
concluded in her report with a paragraph that was almost malicious,
perhaps unwittingly so, with its reference to 'this latest episode'
and 'animal lovers and would-be donation makers' who 'will be
wondering whether their money will be used in the way they want.
And this will hardly be conducive to successful fund-raising'…..the
biggest losers... will be the animals themselves'.
It is not
true, as Ms Dunn wrote, that 'following (Shephard's) sacking,
she and other members trying to enter a committee meeting found
a padlocked door and were escorted from the premises by police
when they refused to leave of their own accord'. She and other
members are she and her sister, Lilian. There was no committee
meeting in progress. There was no padlocked door. There were no
police brought in. Three errors of fact in a single sentence are
a bad score.
'The recent
decision to sack Ms Shephard allegedly stemmed from a breach of
confidence she made by making public certain parts of a letter
she received.' Not true. The decision did not 'allegedly' stem.
It definitely stemmed from a breach of confidence. Ms Shephard
did not receive a letter. The Treasurer of the Committee placed
a letter before the Committee. In this, among other things, he
made reference to members of the staff. That material was confidential
to the Committee. Ms Shephard broke that confidentiality.
Her beliefs
about not wanting to put healthy animals down are not borne out
by statistics she herself kept. The point at issue, though, is
not so much this as the fact that by keeping a substantial number
of kennel dogs, this meant space being taken up and no space available
for new dogs that required the SPCA's loving and caring attention.
'Unfortunately'
your reporter wrote, 'a lack of funds brought the centre's own
neutering programme to an end', but the Lm10 deposit programme
is in place.
All this
and much more your reporter would have learned before filing her
story had she made the slightest attempt to carry out her journalistic
task correctly.
The SPCA
Committee is generally aware, and it is becoming increasingly
clear to the general public that these 'in praise of Mary Shephard'
letters are in part due to her own orchestration. The same letters
by the same letter-writers are often published in The Times, The
Sunday Times, The Malta Independent, The Independent on Sunday.
The implications are repeated ad nauseam. What will happen to
the cats and dogs at the SPCA? The answer is simple. They will
be cared for lovingly in an excellently run Home. Serious attempts
will be made to rehome them. All animals coming into the Home
will be given a fair chance. Our policy is that of RSPCA International,
with whose Head, Mr Bowles, we are constantly in touch.
The President,
Ms Monica Wiedersum, whose known love for animals has extended
to taking in a pregnant bitch from the SPCA because there was
no room for her at the home, bring her to term and home the seven
puppies that were born in her residence. She has taken in other
puppies from the SPCA and found a home for these, too. With Sonia
Coleman, she has puppy-fed eight unweaned puppies, most of whom
have been found a home. She runs an excellent Committee.
We are delighted
that the Home is being run professionally by Ms Christel Selis,
who has a vast knowledge of how this should be done and who is
supported by a small and dedicated staff. The entire Committee
is focused on the needs of the Society - a New Home built to our
specifications, a Home that will include kennels for dogs whose
owners go on holiday, more space for our animals, increased veterinary
procedures. We need funds.
Nobody, no
Mary Shephard and the campaign she is currently waging, should
prevent these being donated to an organisation that is motivated
only by the care and love of animals at the Home, the conduct
of a neutering campaign, an active homing policy and, where no
other alternative exists, to put those animals to sleep whose
quality of life is such that doing so is the most humane alternative.
We are as far away from what orchestrated detractors have been
at pains to point out, a collect and kill policy, as a Society
created for the care of animals can possibly be.
May I end
by remarking that Ms Shephard has not taken a blind bit of notice
of the harm she is creating for the Society and the cats and dogs
she is supposed to love so much.Editor’s note: The main thrust
of Ms Dunn’s article was the fact that arguments and petty
bickering have, for years, unfortunately seemed to blight the
animal welfare organisations in Malta and in some cases this has
overshadowed the causes for which they were set up. Anyone questioning
whether this is true only has to note the other letter on this
page also relating to the SPCA.
...thanks
for the support
From Mary
Shepherd
I would wish
through your paper to thank those who have extended their support
following my abrupt dismissal from my post as Executive Secretary
and member of the committee of the SPCA. I would also wish to
thank all those who have written to support me.
To date I
have not written to give any details regarding my dismissal.
However,
I will not lay myself open to another accusation of a breach of
confidentiality. In accordance with legal advice received, I will
be making my statement at the opportune time. Those of you who
know me will appreciate how difficult it is for me not to react,
especially when I happen to be correct!
I am very
pleased to inform your readers that a number of members of the
Society have requested an Extraordinary General Meeting in terms
of the Rules of the Society. The motion being submitted to the
EGM is seeking my re-instatement as Executive Secretary. Other
members also wishing to support this motion may wish to contact
me on 383723 or 79865723.
The request
has been handed in to the President of the Society on the 8 October
2001 at 5pm giving six weeks' notice for an EGM to be called for
19 November at 6pm. I look forward to seeing you.
|
