Wednesday, 21 June 2006

Microchipping Nanny

In recent times, politicians have either legislated or shown interest in intruding in all these personal matters:
  • 'marrying' people who've lived together for more than two years;
  • where -- and whether -- you smoke;
  • what you put in school lunchboxes and you find in food-vending machines;
  • what you can and can't plant or cut down in your own garden;
  • who gets to renovate your house, and how;
  • who gets to walk across your farm;
And now, today, they're considering:
  • how to keep track of your dog.
First they entered the bedroom; then they came for your lunchboxes and your simple pleasures; then they came for your land; now they're coming for your pets.

Do Nanny's interests extend into everything? Where will it end? Those will of course remain rhetorical questions just as long as you lot continue to allow that lot to meddle in your affairs. As long as you remain compliant, then they'll just keep right on coming.

Maybe it's time to tell them to rack off. One place you might begin telling them is on the issue currently before the house: microchipping your dogs. It needs barely half-a-dozen MPs to change their mind for this legislation to fall. Why not email every one of the 120 MPs today to tell them to throw out the microchipping for dogs legislation. Here are their contact details. Tell them enough is enough. Tell them that Government is intended to be chained up to be our servants, not the other way around. Tell them to throw it out, and tell them today.

First they came for the dogs . . .

UPDATE: A small victory tonight -- perhaps better called a successful rearguard action:
NZPA: Farm dogs exempt from microchipping

Tonight Parliament voted, by the slimmest of margins, to exempt working farm dogs.

The bid had been expected to fail but in a surprise move tonight four of the Green Party's six MPs voted to exempt farm dogs.

The four MPs were Keith Locke, Sue Kedgley, Sue Bradford and Nandor Tanczos.

If any of you contacted any of those four, you may have had more effect than you know.

UPDATE: I've been sent some responses that some of you have received from the pollies. Here's one opf interest. Jim Anderton concedes that the purpose of this legislation is NOT to stop dogs biting people -- how could it? "As I understand it," he says, "the purpose of this initiative is to build a database which will enable the better management and control of the dog population in New Zealand, not to stop dogs from biting." So there you go.

LINKS: Parliament breaks without dog vote - TVNZ
Microchips look a doggone cert - Dominion Post



  1. Maybe I can get my dog trained in time to piss on their legs.

  2. A sad day. We are celebrating that farm dogs are exempt. Some celebration, a new tax and a new intrusion on 90% of dog owners. And what for? To save children from being bitten!

    Just watch the repeal of s59 - abuse stats will go down when smacking is illegal. Yeah right.

    What's the bet the number of cases where CYFS were found to be a little "over-zealous" increase?

  3. I guess we're celebrating, if that's the word, that we got a puch in the face instead of a broken leg.

    And we're celebrating, if that's the word, that this Labour minority Government has been shown that they're not bullet-proof, and that arrogance alone isn't enough.

    You'd like to think they'd get a few more similar reminders, wouldn't you.

  4. This damned silliness is nicely lampooned in the Kiwi Herald "Dogs Look For Work"

  5. Yeah, yeah, Jim. Until the vote, it is "think of the children", after the vote, its "we just want to track every aspect of your life and charge you for the privilege - what's that got to do with helping save children from unregistered dogs bred for fighting? Jeez, you don't expect Politicians to come up with solutions do you? We just spend money tracking shit and make you pay. Check out how much extra we have spent on health in the last few years and compare that to outcomes if you want proof"


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.