I have just been informed that there is a hot debate over in some public forum about spca's online petition and why some NGOs have withdrawn their support.
Perhaps it is necessary to clarify here why I withdrew AnimalCare's support early yesterday morning.
16th May: I was sent a draft by an officer from the SPCA asking for the consent of several NGOs to place their logos in support of the petition. I read the petition and felt it was worth supporting so I gave my consent. The petition was a protest on cruelty inflicted on animals.
19th May: I clicked on the online petition and noticed the published version of the petition was different from the original draft. This new version contained 6 resolutions to the prime minister which was never in the original draft.
I immediately wrote to the SPCA officer concerned and requested to see the original draft but this was not made available. I also enquired why the published version was different from the draft and no explanation was given.
That was reason enough to withdraw our support.
I do not think it is right to send a draft to seek for support and then publish another version which is different from the original.
Furthermore, we do not support two of the new resolutions, ie. Nos 2 and 3 which advocate the capture and euthanasia of stray animals.
AnimalCare has been working so hard to promote CNRM which advocates neuter and return to colony, not capture and euthanise.
Killing is never a wise solution to any problem. What goes around, comes around....in due time.
We cannot possibly support the petition now.
I hope this clarifies our stand. Our logo has been removed as of 8am, 20th May.
I did not see any need to explain why we pulled out and more importantly, I did not want to jeopardise the public's support of the petition, but since there is a big debate going on in some public forum (I avoid public online forums at all costs), perhaps this clarification is now warranted.