Thanks to Straits Times, all of Singapore now knows that Dr Lee Bee Wah lost and subsequently found her pet dog.
In messages on her facebook, Dr Lee says “She (the dog) loved to wander out of the house. Whenever the gate is open, she will sneak out, but every time she will come back after a short while. Yesterday, as usual she sneaked out.”
As a pet owner myself, I was surprised to see this as one of the AVA rules for licensing says “Applicants must comply with AVA’s Conditions of Licensing. All dogs must be properly confined within the owner’s premises. If the dogs are in a public place, they must be on leash and properly supervised and controlled.”
Further AVA says “Owners found breaching the Rules or licence conditions may be compounded for the offence. To avoid higher penalty in court and unnecessary inconvenience, please settle your composition sum promptly.”
Please see:
http://www.ava.gov.sg/AnimalsPetSector/SalesOfPetsOwnershipExhib/DogLicensing/
Since Dr. Lee has confirmed that she did not confine the dog within her premises and also left her dog unleashed in a public place, can we know whether AVA has compounded Dr. Lee for her offence. Also, since Dr. Lee did not comply with a basic licensing requirement, why should her dog license not be cancelled?
If AVA takes no action against Dr Lee, we can only conclude that there is one rule for the ordinary Singaporeans and another for MPs.
Proud Singaporean and RESPONSIBLE pet owner