It is not that we dislike animals, or are wilfully cruel to them. Far from it. Generally, most people in Malta are as kind and loving to pets, and animals in general, as they are known to be hospitable to strangers. But when a cat delivers a litter, or a bitch has eight puppies, the owner is suddenly faced with a problem which for some is overwhelming. The result: dump the unwanted additions to the family. It is heartless and cruel, though not wilfully meant to be so. But to keep them could mean domestic discord. It is the easiest solution, to avoid the difficulty. It hardly occurs to them to contact an animal organisation, perhaps from a misplaced consideration that they might have to explain why they do not want the litter.

There are the rotten apples of course, people who take pleasure in inflicting pain on the defenceless, who look on a dog, when they have one, only for its service, as a guard dog, for instance, or for "pleasure" and income, as a fighter, say, which is illegal but not that rare. But they are the exceptions.

There are then shining examples which we could emulate. The film people of Troy have shown the way in generosity to the SPCA, for which they raised considerable funds, and a former Royal Air Force man has gone to the trouble of building a model of the Ohio tanker to give away in return for an animal ambulance to an association involved in animal welfare.

Malta's main shortcoming is probably that we do not much go out of our way to see about improving matters. People donate a little money, which eases their troubled conscience, and are then neglectful about their responsibilities. But they could instead, at no monetary cost, bring pressure to bear on their political party to start doing something substantial for animals. And substantial need not necessarily be costly.

There are several organisations doing sterling work for the animal world, selflessly, without any remuneration, indeed at times at their own expense, and, to cap it all, without blaring trumpets to make their work known. They do not run after votes, hardly get recognition from anyone, but are owed a huge debt of gratitude by us all.

That debt could start being paid off by the government, for the people whom it represents and of whom it is the tool. But where the government could lead by example, action is far from vigorous. The tool is fairly blunted, lethargy is largely the hallmark.

It should not be too expensive to legislate for the animal world - the NGOs in the sector would be more than willing to point out the shortcomings and the possible remedies. But who would legislate for a dog, a maltreated horse or a neglected kitten, when there are so many other issues to deal with, involving people, their money and welfare, and votes? But is it so difficult to devote some energy to education at school, where a day of activities could be devoted every so often to teach children about animals, for instance.

Cannot an annual prize be established, of a not insubstantial amount of money, to be awarded in recognition of acts of charity to animals. A few hundred liri a year would work wonders with children and parents, and the free publicity about animal awareness such a prize would generate would more than make up for the prize money. There would have to be a panel to act as judges of course, but the government could leave that to the NGOs. We owe it to our animal friends.