Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1497813
maltatoday | SUNDAY • 23 APRIL 2023 8 INTERVIEW Raphael Vassallo rvassallo@mediatoday.com.mt Laws don't protect animals. Enforcement Throughout your Parliamen- tary career, you have con- sistently highlighted issues where 'animal rights' some- how converge with 'human criminality': dog-fighting; unregulated zoos; the regula- tion of dog-breeding; etc. etc. And yet – as evidenced last Monday: when a self-styled 'dog-breeder' was attacked by his own dogs (while facing manslaughter charges, over the fatal mauling of his own grandmother in 2020) – these issues clearly remain 'unad- dressed'. So first of all: why do you think Maltese governments have always been so reluctant, to tackle the purely 'criminal' aspects of animal welfare? Let me put it this way: in Mal- ta, politicians always pay a lot of lip-service to animal welfare, before every election.... only to immediately forget all about it, the very next day. And by 'politicians', I don't just mean 'Labour' or 'Nationalist'. As I always used to say, when I was still involved in politics my- self: this has nothing to do with 'Red or Blue'. Both parties have always been equally guilty; in fact, the only ones who are en- tirely blameless, in all this, are the animals themselves. The problem with animals, however, is that they don't have a vote. That's their only 'fault', as it were... and let's face it: if animals did have a vote, it would be a totally different sto- ry. Politicians would be chasing after them, every single day of the week... But we all know how it is, in reality. As far as local politicians are concerned, animals are nothing more than 'disposable commodities': to be exploit- ed for all they're worth, before every election... and then dis- carded, the moment they are of no further political use. The real problem, however, is that Maltese politicians don't actually see it that way, them- selves. If you ask them – as I have done, countless times, in Parliament - 'What have you ever done for animal welfare, in this country?'... they will say things like: "Look at all the legis- lation we've passed! Look at the Animal Welfare Act! (etc, etc.)" And it's true, you know. Mal- ta HAS, in fact, passed a lot of very good legislation to protect animals, over the years. Then again, however: what's the point in even having all these laws... if we never get around to actually enforcing any of them? Let's face it: without proper enforcement, laws like the 'An- imal Welfare Act' aren't even worth the paper they're printed on. And last Monday's incident was a classic case in point. For example: your newspa- per carried a story, in which the excuse given by the Animal Welfare Director [Pauline Az- zopardi], for not immediately intervening to remove the dogs from the residence, was that 'she was concerned for the safe- ty of her staff'. Or words to that effect, anyway... Actually, I have the quote right here. Her exact words were: "I was not going to put any AWD personnel in danger by just sending them to the house where they would have to face these dangerous dogs." Precisely. But that was just an excuse. The real version of events – and I can easily prove this, if anyone says otherwise – is that the AWD took so long to actually intervene (well over 24 hours, in the end) because they were 'waiting for the police to arrive...' Sorry to interrupt: but on what basis can you confirm that, ex- actly? On the basis that: I followed this case from the beginning; and when I realised that those dogs had been left unfed, all that time, while the authorities were still decidingwhether or not to take any action... I took it upon myself – as is my right, as an an- imal-loving citizen of this coun- try – to call the Animal Welfare Directorate in person, and ask for an explanation. And what they told me, over the phone, was along the lines that: 'they could not take any action, legally, until the police were physically present on site to authorise it'. But not even this answer - which I know, for a fact, to be the correct one – is true. In re- ality, the AWD does NOT re- quire any 'police authorisation', at law, to intervene in such cas- es. The Animal Welfare Act it- self empowers the AWD to take precisely that sort of action, on its own initiative. And I know this, because I was one of the MPs who passed that particular amendment through Parliament. So I also remem- ber all the discussions, at all the various committee stages: when we consulted vets, and all sorts of other experts, to come up with what was even described as – believe it or not - a 'break- through' in animal rights legis- lation! Because that's how it was pre- sented, at the time: as though both sides of the House had just reached an 'unprecedented agreement', that would grant the AWD 'extraordinary pow- ers' – including even 'kicking down doors', wherever neces- sary – to be able to 'rescue ani- mals in distress'; and all the rest of it... But... Ha! [Sarcastic laugh] We can all see, with our own eyes, just how much good that 'breakthrough legislation' actu- ally turned out to be, in prac- tice... And this is the point that I have always tried to get across, in Parliament; and which I am still trying to get across, to- day. It's all very well and good, to have all the right legislation in place. But 'laws' - in and of themselves - make no difference whatsoever, in the daily lives of animals that are suffering. It is only through ENFORCE- MENT of those laws, that we can ever hope to make a real difference. Everything else, is just 'words on a piece of paper'... At the risk of appearing to 'de- fend' the AWD director, how- ever: Pauline Azzopardi also told this newspaper that, "We are lacking staff and space to keep these dangerous dogs. [...] We would like to collect every single dangerous dog, but we cannot do it without space to keep them, and the In the wake of last Monday's dog-attack, former MP MARIO GALEA argues that Malta already has laws to effectively deal with such cases. What it lacks, however, are 'the right people, with the right tools', to actually enforce them