[Tradeban] FW: Those most at risk need a show of compassion - opinion piece

[Sabina]

  _____  

From: Glenys Oogjes [mailto:googjes at animalsaustralia.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, 14 November 2007 12:59 PM
To: googjes at animalsaustralia.org
Subject: Those most at risk need a show of compassion - opinion piece

 

Hi all,

 

It was terrific to see an opinion piece published in the Adelaide Advertiser
yesterday on animal welfare/live export, and suggesting people should
consider the 'interests' of animals during this federal election time.  If
you did not see it - it is below.

 

Best wishes,

Glenys

______________

 

Those most at risk need a show of compassion
The Advertiser, 13 November 2007

 

In our democracy not everyone who has an interest in the way we are governed
has a vote in elections. Those who miss out are children and animals...

In our democracy not everyone who has an interest in the way we are governed
has a vote in elections. Those who miss out are children and animals. It may
seem odd to put children and animals in the same pen or boat but they have a
lot in common.

Children who live in circumstances where they may be harmed have no say in
the arrangements that governments devise to protect them. And animals have
no say in the arrangements that governments devise to protect them or the
arrangements that determine how they are transported and killed. We fail to
protect children and animals because governments are not accountable to
them.

The recent Animals Australia exposition of the barbaric cruelty to which
some Australian animals are subject in the Middle East simply asks: "How is
it that any government allows this?'' That a child known to be at risk can
starve to death leads us to ask: "How is it that any government allows
this?'' An answer is animals and children have no political voice.

It is not likely that children or animals will have votes soon. In the
absence of proxies the next best thing we have for the voteless are
standards that take full account of their interests. For example, an
adequate standard of child protection would be that every report of a child
at risk is investigated adequately (because governments have made sure there
are enough workers to do so) and appropriate action taken. An adequate
standard of animal protection must be that any cruelty will stop the live
export of Australian animals. Cruelty is the worst thing humans do.

An adequate standard would hear Minster McGauran say in response to Animals
Australia: "Yes, you are right, this cruelty must stop and from today
exports will cease'' rather than petulantly labelling Animals Australia as
"extremist''. An adequate standard would hear Minister Brough say: "Enough
is enough, the current system of child protection is failing everywhere; we
will spearhead an overhaul of child protection and take it over if
necessary. Every child at risk will be protected''.

We know that Australians want children and animals to be protected and
treated well. But there is a defect of democracy that allows discordance
between the will of the people and whether governments enact the standards
that the people want. The most important one is that governments are
disconnected from an accountability that goes beyond
ballot-box-accountability. For a government to be accountable in regard to
standards, it must allow itself and its bureaucracy to be held to account at
law. If there were laws that better enabled citizens to bring governments
and agencies to the courts concerning failure to meet such standards, then
surely governments and agencies would act more congruently.

Former prime minister and sometime sage Malcolm Fraser got it right in his
contribution in The Crikey Guide to the 2007 Federal Election. In response
to the question "What should voters look out for at the 2007 election?'' he
writes: "They should try to look out for honesty. They should try to look
out for integrity. They should just avoid anyone who won't actively support
the single most important underpinning of a democratic state, and that's the
rule of law.'' And, "it's all the immigration department stuff. Has anyone
paid a penalty? Has anyone been held accountable? The head of the department
was made an ambassador''.

So spare a thought for the voteless in the next week or so and ask which
future government of Australia will be honest and have integrity in regard
to the most vulnerable in our society. And ask which future government will
neither be cruel nor enable cruelty. We talk about the change in climate and
the need for carbon credits. The moral climate is changing, too, and we are
in need of compassion credits.

* Dr Matt Gaughwin is a public health physician.

Source: The Adelaide Advertiser, 13 November 2007

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://pacat.org/pipermail/tradeban_pacat.org/attachments/20071114/59eb52c0/attachment.html