Sir, The RSPCA has launched, and is presumably funding, an advertising campaign designed to influence public opinion against the Government’s proposed cull of badgers. It asserts that the spread of tuberculosis in cows is cattle to cattle (possibly correct), and not badger to cattle (probably incorrect).

Activities which are designed to sway public opinion, or influence Government policy, on controversial social issues are not charitable, but are rather political in the sense understood by the law: this is stated clearly in the admirable textbook of Hubert Picarda, QC. The campaign is undoubtedly political, and would therefore appear to be inconsistent with the status, and outwith the proper purposes, of the RSPCA as a charitable body.

One cannot help feeling that when the RSPCA was founded, its primary objective was to protect domestic animals from cruel treatment; badgers (like foxes) are a pest species, and may well be outside the society’s remit. Furthermore, an animal can only be cruelly treated as long as it remains alive; one cannot be cruel to a dead one. The cull is aimed at killing badgers, not tormenting them.

As this is not the first occasion on which the RSPCA has engaged in a political campaign, scrutiny of its activities by the Charity Commissioners seems overdue. Those who generously contribute to its funds may be interested to take note of how they are being used.

STANLEY BRODIE, QC
Blackstone House, Temple
London EC4

Explore Letters

• Feedback