Awl Ipswich Suspended Until Further Notice

[tdierikx]

Thank you for coming here to clear the air (somewhat) about the situation at Ipswich pound, Cr Antoniolli.

May we ask whether the RSPCA may have a tender pending for the pound service - and if so, will you be recommending that ANY contractor taking on the pound service should attempt to KEEP working with private rescues to maximise the number of animals rehomed from Ipswich pound? You must admit that this is part of why the AWL have had much success with their rehoming rates to date...

T.

[mita]

May we ask whether the RSPCA may have a tender pending for the pound service -

Go to the source of any tender & ask?

[email protected]

When it was first raised by a poster, I searched the Australian Tenders website.

Also the Ipswich Council has a section on its website where (current) open tenders are listed.

Edited March 26, 2013 by mita

[Cr Andrew Antoniolli]

Thank you for coming here to clear the air (somewhat) about the situation at Ipswich pound, Cr Antoniolli.

May we ask whether the RSPCA may have a tender pending for the pound service - and if so, will you be recommending that ANY contractor taking on the pound service should attempt to KEEP working with private rescues to maximise the number of animals rehomed from Ipswich pound? You must admit that this is part of why the AWL have had much success with their rehoming rates to date...

T.

Please note that the contract is merely suspended. It is not cancelled or terminated. With respect, the question is moot.

[Sheridan]

Thank you for coming here to clear the air (somewhat) about the situation at Ipswich pound, Cr Antoniolli.

May we ask whether the RSPCA may have a tender pending for the pound service - and if so, will you be recommending that ANY contractor taking on the pound service should attempt to KEEP working with private rescues to maximise the number of animals rehomed from Ipswich pound? You must admit that this is part of why the AWL have had much success with their rehoming rates to date...

T.

Please note that the contract is merely suspended. It is not cancelled or terminated. With respect, the question is moot.

Would you be good enough to answer my questiion, please?

I note in terms of Tracey's question, that AWL staff have lost their jobs. It's not moot to them.

Edited March 26, 2013 by Sheridan

[mita]

May we ask whether the RSPCA may have a tender pending for the pound service -

T.

Please note that the contract is merely suspended. It is not cancelled or terminated. With respect, the question is moot.

Yes, the Q'ld Times reported that on 22 March.

THE Animal Welfare League of Queensland began evacuating 140 homeless animals from Ipswich yesterday after the council suspended its contract

Explains why, when I double-checked on the sites where current tenders are listed, none showed.

I guess any next move would depend on the outcome of the investigation.

Edited March 26, 2013 by mita

[Are You Serious Jo]

May we ask whether the RSPCA may have a tender pending for the pound service -

Go to the source of any tender & ask?

[email protected]

When it was first raised by a poster, I searched the Australian Tenders website.

Also the Ipswich Council has a section on its website where (current) open tenders are listed.

Well good luck getting a response from any email that isn't offering them money. Since you seem to be on such good terms with them maybe they'll answer your emails because they've never answered mine! Also, asking whether the rspca will be barred from tendering for the contract once this issue is resolved is not a moot point, it's very relevant to the current events.

[tdierikx]

What exactly are the allegations that necessitated the AWL to remove themselves AND 140 animals from the premises and have their contract suspended?

The fact that the 140 animals were allowed to go with them appears to the layman that the AWL aren't suspected of any acts of negligence or cruelty... or the animals would have had to stay put, yes?

T.

[Are You Serious Jo]

That's a good point, can't be too serious then if they are allowed to care for the same animals.

[Sheridan]

What exactly are the allegations that necessitated the AWL to remove themselves AND 140 animals from the premises and have their contract suspended?

The fact that the 140 animals were allowed to go with them appears to the layman that the AWL aren't suspected of any acts of negligence or cruelty... or the animals would have had to stay put, yes?

T.

And don't forget those who have lost their jobs. Cr Antonelli may suggest that job loss was not necessary given the contract is suspended but if AWL felt it necessary to remove the dogs and to sack people, I'd say they probably think the contract isn't suspended. It would be good to get an AWL point of view.

[SueM]

Very true, the staff are all in limbo, they still have mortgages to pay, let's hope the decision comes sooner rather than later.

[mita]

May we ask whether the RSPCA may have a tender pending for the pound service -

Go to the source of any tender & ask?

[email protected]

When it was first raised by a poster, I searched the Australian Tenders website.

Also the Ipswich Council has a section on its website where (current) open tenders are listed.

Well good luck getting a response from any email that isn't offering them money. Since you seem to be on such good terms with them maybe they'll answer your emails because they've never answered mine! Also, asking whether the rspca will be barred from tendering for the contract once this issue is resolved is not a moot point, it's very relevant to the current events.

You believe I'm on 'good terms' with RSPCA Qld & that they'd answer my emails. Actually, using what I already knew, I took a more direct public information route to check if there were any pending tenders.

So you want the Ipswich Council to announce the barring of the RSPCA from tendering for a service that currently is not up for tender.

A service which already has a contractor, the AWL, which is under suspension. After the current investigation, it may be re-instated or it may be discharged

If discharged, and if any new tenders are called, and if the RSPCA applies, then there would be Council decision-making that would cover the usual identification of conflicts of interests.... and even of perceived conflicts of interest.

Information about any such open tender would appear (as is usual) on the Council's website, so the general public can be aware.

I hope the current investigation will reflect natural justice & be as prompt as possible in reaching some decision.

Tracey, I also thought it a hopeful sign that the AWL was able to take the animals to another place, for care & adoption. Surely that couldn't be allowed to happen if there was strong evidence of serious mistreatmemt.

Edited March 26, 2013 by mita

[SueM]

Hoping it does not come up for tender, Lost Dogs Home anyone?

[tdierikx]

It's not the first time disgruntled ex-volunteers have caused trouble for reputable organisations. I'd like to know the reasons the complainants' are ex-volunteers - were they asked to leave perchance?

T.

[Are You Serious Jo]

May we ask whether the RSPCA may have a tender pending for the pound service -

Go to the source of any tender & ask?

[email protected]

When it was first raised by a poster, I searched the Australian Tenders website.

Also the Ipswich Council has a section on its website where (current) open tenders are listed.

Well good luck getting a response from any email that isn't offering them money. Since you seem to be on such good terms with them maybe they'll answer your emails because they've never answered mine! Also, asking whether the rspca will be barred from tendering for the contract once this issue is resolved is not a moot point, it's very relevant to the current events.

You believe I'm on 'good terms' with RSPCA Qld & that they'd answer my emails. Actually, using what I already knew, I took a more direct public information route to check if there were any pending tenders.

So you want the Ipswich Council to announce the barring of the RSPCA from tendering for a service that currently is not up for tender.

A service which already has a contractor, the AWL, which is under suspension. After the current investigation, it may be re-instated or it may be discharged

If discharged, and if any new tenders are called, and if the RSPCA applies, then there would be Council decision-making that would cover the usual identification of conflicts of interests.... and even of perceived conflicts of interest.

Information about any such open tender would appear (as is usual) on the Council's website, so the general public can be aware.

I hope the current investigation will reflect natural justice & be as prompt as possible in reaching some decision.

Tracey, I also thought it a hopeful sign that the AWL was able to take the animals to another place, for care & adoption. Surely that couldn't be allowed to happen if there was strong evidence of serious mistreatmemt.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Yes, I would expect that the rspca could never tender for a position where there is a real conflict of interest. It shouldn't even have to be said that is how obvious it is. I'm not interested in what current tenders are pending because it should be obvious that the AWL is still under suspension, therefore tenders would not yet be called, hence not on the register.

So, since the AWL may not be reinstated and tenders called in the future, it is entirely appropriate to wonder if the rspca might put in a tender, as they have done at other places. Since looking at the tender register is a waste of time due to no tender process yet existing for this case, it doesn't seem a bad idea to email the rspca. The reason I thought you were on good terms with them was you are always saying how officials talk to you, hence your putting forth an email address, presumably you have used. My experience however is that no one ever emails back, so you must have some connection I don't.

I believe that the rspca should never tender for the management of a property where they also have the power to police the current tenants of that property.

[SueM]

RSPCA did a full inspection of the premises while AWL were still on site and it passed with flying colours. if the problems are management based change management I would of thought. Would be fab if council pitched in a bit and built some new cages etc as well, quite happy for my rates to go to that, rather than rebuilding a park that floods every year and needs another few million thrown at it.

Edited March 26, 2013 by varicool

[megan_]

It's not the first time disgruntled ex-volunteers have caused trouble for reputable organisations. I'd like to know the reasons the complainants' are ex-volunteers - were they asked to leave perchance?

T.

An investigation is taking place. Imagine if the council didn't investigate? Just because someone was sacked doesn't mean the complaints aren't right either.

The complaints must have been very serious for a suspension to take place bs a notice to improve?

[SueM]

Will have to wait and see, I am sure eventually it will all be made public. AWL have always had a fab reputation up here :-)

[Rosetta]

RSPCA did a full inspection of the premises while AWL were still on site and it passed with flying colours. if the problems are management based change management I would of thought. Would be fab if council pitched in a bit and built some new cages etc as well, quite happy for my rates to go to that, rather than rebuilding a park that floods every year and needs another few million thrown at it.

So agree with those sentiments. Its about time all councils showed a lot more dedication to seeking ways to help improve the animal welfare problem. While all this is happening what about the poor dogs coming into the pound environment now? What will be the PTS rate - will it be all a bit too difficult for most dogs to pass the temp test?

[tdierikx]

It's not the first time disgruntled ex-volunteers have caused trouble for reputable organisations. I'd like to know the reasons the complainants' are ex-volunteers - were they asked to leave perchance?

T.

An investigation is taking place. Imagine if the council didn't investigate? Just because someone was sacked doesn't mean the complaints aren't right either.

The complaints must have been very serious for a suspension to take place bs a notice to improve?

AWL QLD have an awesome reputation for their progressive moves toward a sustainable no-kill solution... and if this all ends up being a hoo-haa raised by some disgruntled ex-volunteers, then shame on them!

Seriously though - most kennels are not the prettiest places at the best of times... but the fact that the RSPCA did not find anything amiss with the conditions or the animals in care should have counted for something...

T.

[mita]

[

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Yes, I would expect that the rspca could never tender for a position where there is a real conflict of interest. It shouldn't even have to be said that is how obvious it is. I'm not interested in what current tenders are pending because it should be obvious that the AWL is still under suspension, therefore tenders would not yet be called, hence not on the register.

So, since the AWL may not be reinstated and tenders called in the future, it is entirely appropriate to wonder if the rspca might put in a tender, as they have done at other places. Since looking at the tender register is a waste of time due to no tender process yet existing for this case, it doesn't seem a bad idea to email the rspca. The reason I thought you were on good terms with them was you are always saying how officials talk to you, hence your putting forth an email address, presumably you have used. My experience however is that no one ever emails back, so you must have some connection I don't.

I believe that the rspca should never tender for the management of a property where they also have the power to police the current tenants of that property.

Where did I say that the RSPCA wouldn't put in a tender if the AWL is discharged as contractor & new tenders are called? I even said 'if they did'.... Given I haven't a clue what they'd do.

I've indicated that, given a number of 'ifs' which take the matter into the future .... usual conflict of interest and perceived conflict of interest 'calls' would apply if new tendering is called. Open tenders have to appear on the Council website, so the public would be aware and could make comment.

You are asking the Council to make a pronouncement, now, on a future hypothetical tendering scenario where key participants aren't known.

You want the Council to say, now, that the RSPCA will be barred.

I'm saying usual tendering processes will be in place, whoever key participants would be. And any relevant 'calls' about conflict of interest can be made. There's nothing wrong in doing so.

You're also free to state your concerns about a hypothetical future scenario. Anything less would be censorship.

You say I'm 'always saying' how RSPCA officials talk to me. Last time an RSPCA ''official' (Inspector) spoke with me was years ago about a local matter many of us were concerned about.

And you say my 'putting forth' an email address for the RSPCA shows I've used it & have some connection.

I had to look it up on the RSPCA website for the purpose of the post.

Edited March 26, 2013 by mita