What’s Behind Cruelty To Animals

Thursday, 1 August 2024, 3:57 pm
Opinion: Ian Powell

When the political left uses a class analysis to consider the nature of capitalism in its various forms, it usually sees it as being based on the relationship between labour and capital with the latter controlling and benefiting from the surplus value of the former.

At its core this class analysis characterises capitalism as being driven primarily by wealth accumulation.

When this is drilled down to employment relations it is seen in terms of employers benefiting, from the exploitation of their workers; benignly or otherwise, lightly or otherwise.

Sometimes, more often than many would be prepared to admit, this exploitation involves cruelty, particularly of those in vulnerable employment.

Migrant labour in New Zealand is arguably the easiest of vulnerable workforces to immediately identify.

But cruelty is not confined to humans. Animals, including pets, are not always spared. This can be at a much lower, but still concerning, level of severity than can be seen in some other countries.

This is highlighted by Newsroom politics journalist  Emma Hatton (19 July): SPCA fury to support farming, not protect pets.

Companion farm pets

The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) has a proud record of proactively and reactively protecting animals from cruelty for over 150 years. Its abbreviation is one of the most well-known and trusted names in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Hatton reports the “fury” of SPCA over the direction of the Associate Minister of Agriculture, ACT MP Andrew Hoggard, to the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee to cease working on welfare standards for pet rabbits, cats and dogs. He is also a former Federated Farmers national president.

Currently there is no code of welfare that sets minimum standards for the ownership of pet farm rabbits. The code for companion dogs is 14 years old and the one for cats is 17 years old.

SPCA’s inspectorate is tasked with protecting companion animals. It depends on welfare code when bringing a prosecution under the Animal Welfare Act.  Both existing codes are outdated; “almost irrelevant”.

The Society had been working with the Advisory Committee to both update these companion codes and develop a new one for pet rabbits. 

Hoggard has now intervened to stop this work. This is despite the fact that this committee is supposed to be independent.

Further, in respect of farm livestock welfare, he has instructed his advisory committee to consider the financial implications its plans may have on farmers.

In his words, “…it was appropriate for the Committee to have to consider the practicality and economic effects of its welfare proposals.”  Farms, of course, are businesses which need to accumulate profits.

Meanwhile 9,700 kilometres away

The capitals of New Zealand and Thailand are over 9,700 kilometres apart. As big as this distance is, it pales into insignificance when the exploitative neglect of companion farm pets in the former is contrasted with that of draught elephants in the latter.

Elephants have long had cultural and religious significance in Thailand which has helped to sustain their population over the centuries. Prior to 2020 at least, there were up to an estimated 7,300 elephants in this Asian country.

Of this number fewer than 48% (3,500) of them were likely to have been wild elephants living in their own natural habitats.

The remainder were domestic elephants estimated at around 3,800. Of these, more than 2,700 (at least 71%) were used in the exploitative tourism industry. Included among the rest were those working in the also exploitative logging industry.

Wild elephants have protections under Thai law. However, this protection deliberately excludes registered draught animals, such as those working in tourism and logging.

Elephant sanctuaries: humanity at its best

In late June I visited Phuket and had the opportunity to visit the Phuket Elephant Sanctuary, the first Thai ethical elephant sanctuary. There are now 13 such sanctuaries in Thailand.

Subsequently, as a co-panellist, I discussed this in the ‘I’ve been thinking’ segment of Radio New Zealand’s The Panel (18 July; first item in the following link): Elephant exploitation and sanctuary protection.

The message taken from my visit was powerful. Captive elephants are suffering by being forced to live in unnatural and traumatic conditions. They are imprisoned by their captors.

Elephants in sanctuaries were rescued from situations of cruelty, abuse, and exploitation. None are young; all arrived in very poor shape.

They were seriously physically damaged. Among them were partially or fully blind elephants due to being unnecessarily exposed by their captors to the sun for prolonged periods of time.

There is no comparison between rescuing abused elephants in Thailand and animals in New Zealand. In the latter case, animal abuse can be prosecuted and pets physically rescued. In the former case, exploitative business owners can’t be.

Sanctuaries have to negotiate a price and usually when the physical and other damage has already been done and the elephant’s earning capacity reduced or gone. And then there is the cost of transportation for sanctuaries to absorb.

Take-home points

The Phuket sanctuary was not just impressive; it was emotionally overpowering: Humanity at its kindest. There were 18 elephants in this spacious natural setting, each with their own dedicated adult to protect them from accidents.

I came away from the sanctuary with two overall take-home points. First, I was overwhelmed by the stunning quality of care the elephants received in the large open space of the sanctuary. It was as natural as elephant safety requirements could allow.

Second, I was shocked by the inhumane and cruel exploitation that these captive elephant had been brutally subjected to.

This cruel exploitation was not driven by the need for the elephant captors to be profitable. Instead it was driven by the all-consuming desire to maximise profits to the fullest extent.

This is the wealth accumulation foundation of capitalism at its most visible harshness. It is not just greed; it is ‘greed plus’.

© Scoop Media

Ian Powell

Otaihanga Second Opinion is a regular health systems blog in New Zealand.

Ian Powell is the editor of the health systems blog 'Otaihanga Second Opinion.' He is also a columnist for New Zealand Doctor, occasional columnist for the Sunday Star Times, and contributor to the Victoria University hosted Democracy Project. For over 30 years , until December 2019, he was the Executive Director of Association of Salaried Medical Specialists, the union representing senior doctors and dentists in New Zealand.

Contact Ian Powell

• Website - Otaihanga Second Opinion