Maybe it's the water in Parkdale but both its Member of Parliament and its Member of Provincial Parliament are involved in trying to improve animal welfare related laws.

There's Cheri DiNovo (NDP), MPP for Parkdale-High Park, who is fighting to appeal the horrendous anti-Pit Bull sections of the Dog Owner's Liability Act in our province.

From Ontario Dogs Vote:

In May of 2010, NDP-MPP Cheri DiNovo introduced private member’s Bill 60 to repeal the breed specific portion of the Dog Owners Liability Act (BSL) enacted by the then Attorney General Michael Bryant and the Liberal Provincial Government in August 2005.

Bill 60 became known as Hershey’s Bill (and we pray Hershey’s Law) in honour of a beautiful “pit bull” named Hershey. She was used as a breeding dog in a puppy mill; kept locked in a cage 24/7, never loved or fed properly, abused and then abandoned after they were done with her. Hershey was rescued by a shelter where she was finally adopted by her angel, Jennifer Waite. Jennifer showered Hershey with love and affection and eventually Hershey became a Certified St. John’s Ambulance Therapy Dog. She became very attached to the seniors she would visit, as they did her.

In 2005, Hershey was presented with an award from the Toronto Humane Society during Be Kind to Animals Week, due to her outstanding service with the seniors and her restricted breed status in Ontario. Sadly Hershey, and other “pit bulls”, was no longer allowed to work as a therapy dog in Ontario and would now be considered a dangerous dog and be forced to wear a muzzle. This Bill is in memory and honour of Hershey, the dog who changed the lives of many; the dog who was a true “pit bull”.

There will be one final Toronto rally before the fall provincial elections in support of Hershey's Bill on Saturday October 1, 2011. Even if you're not the rallying type, check this one out for all the great dogs that'll be brought along.


Fighting alongside Dinovo for animal justice is Peggy Nash (NDP), MP for Parkdale-High Park, who is reintroducing Bill C-232 originally created by Mark Holland (Liberal) which aims to strengthen the laws which protect animals against cruelty.

Animal cruelty laws in Canada are a farce and recent "improvements" to them do little but contribute lip service to the idea of protecting animals. Fines and jail times may have been increased but when it's still just as difficult to convict perpetratore of even the most heinous cruelty, what's the point?

Holland's bill aimed to get rid of the loopholes which let too many animal torturers slip through the stubby fingers of the law but Holland lost his seat in the last federal election so Peggy Nash has stepped forward to champion the bill in Parliament.

From Hansard, June 16, 2011 :

This bill would better protect animals from intentional cruelty. Clearly, animals are sentient beings; they are not property. This bill would take the provision about animal cruelty out of the property section of the Criminal Code.

We have seen far too many examples of animal cruelty that escape the current laws. This bill would increase the likelihood of conviction for animal cruelty.

Excerpts from Bill-232:

Definition of “animal”

182.1 In this Part, “animal” means a vertebrate, other than a human being.


Killing or harming animals

182.2 (1) Every one commits an offence who, wilfully or recklessly,

(a) causes or, being the owner, permits to be caused unnecessary pain, suffering or injury to an animal;

(b) kills an animal without lawful excuse;

(c) in any manner encourages, promotes, arranges, assists at or receives money for the fighting or baiting of animals, including the keeping or management of premises for the purpose of animal fighting or training an animal to fight another animal;

(d) without reasonable excuse, administers a poisonous or injurious drug or substance to a domestic animal, or an animal wild by nature that is kept in captivity, or, being the owner of such an animal, permits a poisonous or injurious drug or substance to be administered to it;

(e) promotes, arranges, conducts, assists in, receives money for or takes part in any meeting, competition, exhibition, pastime, practice, display or event at or in the course of which captive animals are liberated by hand, trap, contrivance or any other means for the purpose of being shot at the moment they are liberated; or

(f) being the owner, occupier or person in charge of any premises, permits the premises or any part of the premises to be used in the course of an activity referred to in paragraph (c) or (e).


Punishment

(2) Every one who commits an offence under subsection (1) is guilty of

(a) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years; or

(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction and liable to a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars or imprisonment for a term of not more than eighteen months or to both.


Aboriginal rights

182.6 (1) For greater certainty, nothing in this Part shall be construed so as to abrogate or derogate from the protection provided for existing aboriginal or treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada by the recognition and affirmation of those rights in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.


Other rights

(2) For greater certainty, nothing in this Part shall be construed so as to abrogate or derogate from any legal right to hunt or fish or to engage in the slaughter of food animals.

For more information on this, check out the Facebook page here.