From Matthew Merry Sir: When I read your leading article
(which also criticised the RSPCA) I felt thankful that at long last a journal with an international reputation has publicly attacked both these institutions. Both have lost their way in terms of their original purpose and they no longer deserve the support of the public. The RSPCA receives about £80 million each year from legacies and donations, but little of this money is spent directly on animals. Most goes on maintaining an organisation bloated with administrators and other highly paid staff. The words 'liaison' and 'adviser' are common in their job titles. Less than one third of their employees are working in the field as inspectors, most of whom are ill-equipped for the task. Inspectors often have to seek resources from their local RSPCA branch.
The public should distinguish between the national RSPCA and local RSPCA branches. The latter are run by volunteers and deal with about 85 per cent of the animals taken into care. Branches have to raise their own funds to sustain their work. The public mistakenly believes that branches are financially supported by the national RSPCA and little is done to dispel this belief. So only a small percentage of the £80 million, if that, gets to a small number of branches in the form of grants.
Matthew Merry
Seascale, Cumbria
Previous page
