Page 440 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 27 June 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
1980 had penalties of $1,000 or six months' imprisonment, but in relation to domestic animals there are penalties still in force under which there is a maximum fine of $100 for cruelty. I think cruelty to animals, either in the wild or in a city like Canberra, is quite reprehensible. Animals are helpless creatures, and wanton cruelty and viciousness towards them are some of the most gutless acts I think man can do to other beings. It is totally indefensible, and substantial penalties should result.
I would encourage the Chief Minister and the Government to look as a matter of urgency to upgrading the penalties and indeed the powers which the RSPCA especially lacks in relation to the protection of domestic animals as well. I undertake to give the Chief Minister the name of the relevant ordinance which currently escapes me.
MR DUBY (8.22): Mr Speaker, when I first heard that the Nature Conservation (Amendment) Bill 1989 was about the protection of endangered species and then realised that it had the support of both the Labor and Liberal parties I thought to myself, "Here they go again", because there is no more endangered species in this Territory than those two respective parties. Having made a close examination of the Bill, I realise that it refers to wildlife and, Mr Speaker, I am pleased to support this Bill.
The environment - and the flora and fauna of the ACT - is one of our greatest assets. What other city in Australia can boast vast areas of natural bushland in the heart of the metropolis? Where else in Australia can we find kangaroos and a large array of birdlife in the middle of the inner city suburbs? But these assets which are a delight to all of us, I think, and to our increasing numbers of visitors to this city cannot be taken for granted. They need to be protected, and this Bill assists by improving the machinery for that protection.
The Bill will have the effect of bringing the Nature Conservation Act up to date. I believe it was in 1980 that it was first brought in, and obviously a number of matters need to be raised, in particular the matter of penalties. Not only will it update the Act but also it will present the ACT with an opportunity to demonstrate to its citizens and to the citizens of other States that we care about our unique flora and fauna and that we are serious about protecting it.
All parties, I believe, in the election campaign made strong commitments to the protection of the ACT environment, and this Bill should help us to honour those commitments. Apart from updating the Act, the Bill will have a number of other effects. As I said, it increases penalties for offences, and it closes off loopholes in the law so that the law in the ACT is similar to the law of the States and the Northern Territory. I believe it streamlines procedures for enforcing the Act, and that is to be welcomed.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .