Page 2826 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 11 October 2022
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
necessary updates to clarify existing policies and operations, ensuring that animal management and welfare legislation stays reflective of this fast-changing and important space.
While progressing the responsible cat ownership reforms earlier this year, the need to further align how dogs and cats are managed did not go unnoticed. In particular, the existing multiple cat licensing framework was found to be lacking in clarity compared to that for dogs, with no set duration, no explicit requirement for the applicant’s name or address and no requirement for identifying each cat on the licence.
The new responsible cat ownership reforms implemented from 1 July 2022 have marked a shift in how cat ownership is understood, as more people than ever now recognise the serious impact of poorly managed pets on our native wildlife and the welfare and safety of cats. The amendments introduced today build on these changing attitudes by aligning the frameworks for multiple dog and cat licences, making them consistent, fit for purpose and more streamlined. The bill also makes updates to align other sections of the legislation with existing animal management and welfare services and functions, safeguarding the policies and processes that work and ensuring that our laws remain practical and accurate.
I will start by explaining the need to align the multiple dog and cat licensing frameworks in more detail. Currently, these frameworks both require the registrar to consider the suitability of the premises for four or more dogs or cats. These requirements will remain in place, as these are important considerations relating to the size, security and nature of the premises, how many dogs or cats will be kept there and the potential impact on neighbouring properties. These requirements will be given additional supports under this bill through the introduction of a set two-yearly duration for dogs and cats and clearer application requirements for cats. In particular, the multiple cats framework does not explicitly require the person’s name, address and registration numbers for each cat, which is needed for tracking purposes. I note that this information is already included voluntarily for multiple cat licences. I understand that the processes will not present any disruption for applicants. However, it is important that our legislation explicitly states these requirements for clarity, consistency and transparency, as is already the case for multiple dog licences.
Minor changes are also made to the existing multiple dog framework. The bill takes a practical approach to dog and cat management by reducing the administrative burden on Domestic Animal Services officers and people who hold multiple dog licences, which this bill recognises are lower risk compared with other dog management licences. Specifically, the renewal requirement for multiple dog licences is proposed by this bill to change from annual to two-yearly, halving the need for applications to renew, including halving the number of renewal fees. This will also apply to multiple cat licences, which are currently ambiguous and rely on DAS officers to determine the durations on a case-by-case basis with the applicant.
This new two-yearly duration promotes the right to equality and non-discrimination by reducing the number of renewals and, in turn, the costs, for those experiencing financial hardship. While we understand application fees play an important role in supporting the administrative cost of their operation, multiple dog and cat licences do not involve a high risk requiring annual renewal in light of other licensing
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video