It is time for a general tax on pets to be able to arrange collective care for them, says Herman Blom.
Although the popularity of the pet visibly decreased towards the end of the pandemic, the corona period was a highlight in the pet love of many Dutch people. Once again it turned out: There are many things that make people bond with their animals. For example, because the animal gives them something to hold on to, counteracts loneliness or provides exercise during the daily walk with the dog. Isn’t it wonderful: an animal accepts you as you are, whether you are having financial difficulties or not. How you are, move and go, your dog or cat loves you! Pets therefore provide social order, because people derive mental stability and a rhythm in the day from them, especially for those who no longer work or cannot or do not want to work. Pets provide support.
To commit
Dutch people are concerned about the well-being of their pets. Unfortunately, relative poverty in the Netherlands is increasing. The livelihood security of Dutch people is a current point of concern and discussion. But what about the ‘security of existence’ of our pets? Should we take this into account and if so, what should we do to increase the well-being of dogs, cats, guinea pigs and, for example, rabbits?
Pets are increasingly seen as family members. This gives them a higher social status in the Netherlands than ever before. The demand for highly qualified veterinary care, for more luxurious pet food or for sensible use of time for pets is increasing. Many people tend to make major financial sacrifices to keep their family friend healthy and on their feet. The average dog or cat owner is willing to spend around 800 euros for their pets, according to a 2014 TNS-NIPO poll. That amount will now be higher. For example, the pet insurance market has picked up considerably in recent years, which is conceivable given all the financial risks associated with pets.
When people can’t afford medical expenses for their pets, what then? Do we accept that? Is it an option to just get rid of your animal? That sounds easy and can also be easy given the many pets that were released into the woods and meadows towards the end of the Corona period, or were handed over to the overflowing animal shelters or left on the doorstep.
Subsistence security
Social security for pets is therefore an issue. Several municipalities now have their food banks for pets or their allowance scheme for pet owners. Amsterdam has the ADAM scheme where residents with a city pass are reimbursed for a vet visit once a year. Other cities also have similar arrangements. In the North we know the Golden Paw. This is a food bank for animals that offers help to people with a small budget and with pets. De Gouden Poot works with a food bank, transport for sick animals and by providing advice and assistance to animal owners with a limited budget.
Social security for pets is a current issue in the Netherlands. It is best to view this social security as a collective problem, that is, of all citizens involved. All Dutch pet owners who want to afford a dog, cat, guinea pig or rabbit can best arrange this together with a specific local tax as an expression of solidarity. The municipalities can facilitate this. Citizens without pets naturally go out freely. What could be more obvious than expanding the system of dog taxes and thus using it as the basis of a collective care arrangement for pets? Although the dog tax has been abolished in many municipalities, this could well have been a wrong move in light of this current civilizing trend. Let’s arrange the financing of collective care for the livelihood of pets with a municipal pet policy and pet tax. Pet owners will support each other this way. Dogs, cats, rabbits and guinea pigs will enjoy greater social security in the future through municipal initiatives.
Herman Blom is a publicist