FOR those who have waited patiently for more than a decade for new animal welfare laws, comments from the head of the department responsible will be of little comfort.

The new law, according to the Commerce and Employment minister, is little more than a ‘tidying up exercise’ bringing order to a plethora of ordinances that currently govern animal welfare.

Essentially, she told listeners to the BBC radio phone-in, current regulations already outlaw cruelty and people who think that the new law will change the world are sadly misinformed.

Looking at the 2003 Billet, which supposedly provides a framework for the law, it is hard not to feel misled. Either civil servants and lawyers have ignored the 71-page report or the minister is wrong to have such low aspirations.

For the report contains 58 specific points which seek to protect all animals in the island.

Some are very important.

For example, at present the courts cannot ban a person after the first cruelty offence from owning animals other than dogs. The law would change that and also allow judges to impose up to six months’ jail or a fine of up to £10,000.

It is also envisaged that the police could take action if an act is likely to result in cruelty to an animal.

At present an act has to actually occur before the law steps in.

It would also place a duty of care on animal owners to safeguard five basic rights for an animal.

These include freedom from thirst, hunger, pain, disease, fear and distress.

Also recommended were guidelines that the ownership of some dangerous breeds of dogs could be outlawed and that breeders of dogs with poor histories should be experts in their field.

And so the recommendations went on.

The 13,000 islanders who signed the petition which helped bring about a review thought change was needed and the deputies who drew up the report agreed.

Unfortunately, if the minister responsible has been persuaded it is little more than a tidying up exercise, is it any surprise that the law is taking so long to put into place?