Page 5974 - Week 18 - Wednesday, 11 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Detail Stage
Bill, by leave, taken as a whole
MR JENSEN (6.36): I have circulated an amendment to clause 12 which would omit the words "or 2 metres from a boundary fence" from the legislation. I move:
Clause 12, page 5, line 14, proposed paragraph 18C(3)(a), omit "or 2 metres from a boundary fence, and".
It has been put to me that the figure of two metres from a boundary fence is quite a distance and that it could cause some problems for people seeking to establish in their backyard a run for dogs. I am not necessarily in favour of runs. I prefer to have dogs outside that environment, but some people are required to do that for their breeding operations.
It seems to me that, as we progressively reduce the size of our backyards, we are causing some potential problems. Maybe what we should be doing, rather than specifying a two-metre boundary, is making use of current design and siting guidelines in relation to the erection of structures near the boundary fence. I wonder, as an aside, whether there are currently similar regulations on the keeping of chook pens in the ACT, and whether we have a two-metre requirement for the construction of a chook house in the ACT. I am not quite sure whether we do, but Mr Wood may like to provide the answer to that question.
MR WOOD (Minister for Education and the Arts and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (6.37): Mr Speaker, we oppose this amendment. The fact is that we are responding to the demands from the community, and the immense number of complaints every year about dogs. A significant proportion of those complaints relate to dogs startling and scaring owners next door, as they jump on the fence because of the proximity to the fence. Where a keeper has four or more dogs, I think it is entirely reasonable that they be separated from that common boundary line.
Amendment negatived.
MR JENSEN (6.38): I move:
Clause 15, page 8, line 9, proposed paragraph 21(6)(c), after "in", insert ", training for".
I think I have made my point on this. I know that I am going to go down, but I think it is important to have that proposal at least put forward on the record.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .