Friday, 11 November 2011

This could make the fur fly.......

From Bild we learn that yet more cost is to be imposed on us. For those non-conversant with the German language, try this link and use Google translate.

I am unable to get odds from Wm. Hill on Cameron barking 'No' and the odds on him crying 'Meow' aren't worth having!

7 comments:

PeterCharles said...

The RSPCA, Kennelclub, PDSA, local authorities etc. have all been lobbying for it for years, they might even be a part of the shadowy hand behind the initiative in the first place.

We tend to forget that lobbying is not particularly fruitful in Westminster anymore, those who really want to influence things already know to go to Europe. I rather suspect Big business and the Financial sector, being political parasites for centuries, were very late to recognise this, hence our failure of influence in these areas largely from depending on government to argue the UK corner, no doubt stemming from the practice of reciprocal sycophancy between government and business. Even moguls tend to cling to standard practice.

Anyway, back to the question, with the NGOs gung ho for it I am sure Cameron will soon be telling us how it is essential for animal protection and anti cruelty and saving children from potentially savage attacks that we adopt this as soon as possible. After all, you never know when a register of pets will be useful and no doubt every council will have to employ at least one enforcement and control officer and no one who loves their pets would mind the £30 or whatever it is charge.

The Gray Monk said...

This has been debated in Germany and one or two of the "Lander" have tried to introduce it. The lovely Angela is not in favour as it is extremely difficult to enforce and not at all popular where it has been.

So she may yet frustrate Whitehall and Brussels for you ...

PeterCharles said...

GM. It is the continental attitude to pets, nowhere near the mawkish sentimentality and anthropomorphising of Britain, that makes me suspect it was our own do-gooding meddlers behind this idea. The continental view of cats and dogs is more in line with our farming fraternity, they are only tolerable when they are useful.

WitteringsfromWitney said...

PC & TGM: You both are no doubt correct in what you say. PC has hit on the additional costs of both vet's fees and also the increased cost to the public purse employing the necessary jobsworths.

If it is anyone's decision to 'chip' their pet it must be the owners - not bloody government, whether national or foreign!

Dave H said...

I have mixed feelings on this, our cats are chipped because they're international jet-setters and needed it to go with the rabies stuff, but that was our choice to spend the money.

However, we also have a aged dog and I'd be annoyed to have to cough up money for him, given his expected residual lifespan. He's unlikely to run off and probably isn't fit enough for flying, so there's no need for him to be chipped and registered except to satisfy some mad bureaucrat's need for yet another database, and I have no wish to pay for that.

WitteringsfromWitney said...

DH: In other words you agree with my second paragraph of the response to PC & TGM?

Ian said...

It'll be yellow stars next....