Ministry for Primary Industries
Manat□ Ahu Matua
OIA23-0318
4 July 2023
Grace Haden
fyi-request-23015-94170b50@requests. fyi. org. nz
Dear Grace Haden
Thank you for your email of 6 June 2023 requesting information relating to RNZSPCA
compliance. Your request has been considered under the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA).
I shall quote and respond to each part of your request below.
By way of OJA please provide all agreements ,mou's, conditions which
1. take into account the removal of branches and membEw societies of the
RNZSPCA
2. performance and technical standards which allow for the crown to prosecute for
and on behalf of the as though the RNZSPCA is a
crown 1mtity
The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) provided you with the most recent Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) and Performance and Technical Standards (PTS) between MPI and
SPCA as part of OIA22-0654 on 10 October 2022.
3. provisons which apply with regards to the crown undertaking prosecutions for this
private organisation e.g. who has to ensure that the solictor generals guide lines are
followed
As previously advised in OIA22-0654, MPI does not hold information which would fall within
this part of your request. MPI understands that you have raised concerns with the Attorney
General regarding Crown Solicitors representing the SPCA and that Crown Law has
responded to you. Therefore, this part of your request is decline pursuant to section 18(g) of
the OIA -
the information requested is not held by the department or venture or Minister of
the Crown or organisation.
4. Compliance with section 122 ..
has this been reviewed with regards to 122(d)
and122 (e) and how are inspectors held properly answerable to the organisation
MPI audits SPCA annually for compliance with the requirements of an approved organisation
and you have previously been advised of this after you alleged the SPCA failed to meet
these standards. Some of these issues were raised in your complaint to MPI on 8 June 2022.
MPI looked at SPCA's processes for selecting and appointing inspiactors in its 2021 audit. A
copy of that audit report was provided to you on 29 September 20212.
Charles Fergusson Building, 34-38 Bowen Street
PO Box 2526
Wellington 6140, New Zealand
agriculture.govt.nz
5. when Inspectors are seizing animals without documentation and euthanising dogs
without written consent who holds them accountable the Director general or the
RNZSPCA
As previously advised on 29 June 2022, under the MOU between MPI and the SPCA, each
party to that MOU is responsible for investigating and resolving any complaints about the
actions or omissions of its own staff (unless the complaint relates to an SPCA inspector or
auxiliary officer and the SPCA elects to refer the complaint to MPI for investigation).
The Animal Welfare Act covers the responsibilities of an approved organisation and the
Minister's powers in respect of such an organisation or in respect of animal welfare
inspectors (section 124), and the Director General's powers in respect of animal welfare
auxiliary officers ( section 125).
The MOU provided to you on 29 June 2022 covers the responsibilities of MPI and the SPCA
The legal requirements for both seizure of animals during inspection or via search warrant,
and euthanasia with or without the owner's consent, are set out in the Animal Welfare Act.
6. What investigations has the Director general undertaken into conduct of the
RNZSPCA staff with regards to the prosecution of Wallance and Glover where the
crown prosecutted and there was no chain of evidence due to the inspectors failing
to record microchip numbers at the time of seizing the animals .
without that chain of
evidence there could not have been any evidence that the animals seized were
those examined by the vets hence there could not have been compliance with the
solictor generals prosecution guide lines.
The Minister and MPI advised you of the actions it would take in response to your 8 June 2022
complaint.
MPI will make no further comment on the factual background to the case
SPCA v Wallace and
Glover. As advised in our letters of 19 July 2022 and 6 September 2022, the Court has made
decisions regarding the SPCA's seizure and disposal of Ms Glover and Ms Wallace's dogs and the
SPCA's prosecution of Ms Glover and Ms Wallace. The Courts were the proper forum for Ms
Glover or Ms Wallace to raise concerns regarding the seizure, disposal, and prosecution.
7.
I refer to OJA 23-003 there appears to be a
misinterpretation between the MP/
and the SPCA as to who is responsible for the conduct of an inspector, section 124
&
126 place them under the control of the director general but it appears that the
director genrea/ has no over sight even to the extent that the MP/ was unaware as to
who employed Plowright OIA20-0861 if that is the case how does the MP/ assess
122 ( d) and how was the application for inspector advanced if ther MP/ had no
evidence as to who Plowright was employed by
Please refer to my response to part four of your request.
8 .
in 2019 Spca inspectors, including Plowright removed several dogs from the
Glover property and were subsequently returned by the chief inspector in dee 2019 .
please advise what investigations have been conducted into theses unlawful
seizurse and what action was taken with rergards to the inspectors not acting in
accordance to the legislative requirtements
As advised in the response in part 6 of your request, MPI will make no further comment on
the factual background to the case
SPCA v Wallace and Glover.
2
9. History appears to be repeating itself and more dogs have been removed from
the new owners of the volkerson kennels .
again without any adherence to the
legislative requirements ,
what oversight is being provided by the director general
into the conduct of SPCA officers to ensure that they comply with their legislative
obligations the action of these inspectors and the continued action proves that the
RNZSPCA cannot be trusted with the powers under the ctnimal welfare act .
Please refer to my response to part four of your request.
Should you have any concerns with this response, I would encourage you to raise these with
the Ministry for Primary Industries at [email address]. Alternatively, you
are advised of your right to also raise any concerns with the Office of the Ombudsman.
Contact details are: Office of the Ombudsman, PO Box 10152, Wellington 6143 or at
info@ombudsman. parliament. nz.
Yours sincerely
Glen Burrell
Director Compliance & Response
3