Page 1043 - Week 04 - Thursday, 18 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The views of those in the community who might be inclined to challenge the Government on a particular matter are not wanted by this Government. They do not want to be swayed from their single-minded, tunnel-vision, narrow perspective of how they see most things.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I realise that there are administrative reasons why this Bill needs to be considered today in order to meet the licensing requirements, et cetera. I must say that we are broadly in agreement with the Bill. However, to have contemplated the introduction of the Bill with little or no time for our consideration, let alone that of interested groups such as the RSPCA, is not good government. It is not good government and it is not good management. In that regard, the Minister for the Environment has on two occasions in the past two days indicated to the house that various organisations I indicated to him were consulted on the Animal Welfare Bill - the first time on Tuesday night in his speech during the debate on the Animal Welfare Bill and the second time in answer to my question without notice to him yesterday. I happen to know that this is not the case. I have received letters from seven organisations saying that they were not consulted on the Animal Welfare Bill.
I would like to read a portion of one of the letters we received in this regard from the RSPCA which relates to the lack of consultation on the Bill we are considering now. I refer to the letter from Mr Neil Turner, director of the RSPCA.
Mr Lamont: Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order on the question of relevance. We are discussing the Dog Control (Amendment) Bill; we are not discussing the Animal Welfare Bill.
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Westende has already indicated that he does believe that it is relevant in relation to the Dog Control (Amendment) Bill, although it relates to the Animal Welfare Bill. I am quite prepared to allow him to draw on the statement.
MR WESTENDE: It reads:
Dear Mr Westende,
I would like to thank you for consulting us over the introduction of the Animal Welfare Bill. We were sent a copy of the Bill by Mr Bill Wood but have had no further contact with him regarding it.
We are the largest animal welfare organisation in the ACT and through our membership of RSPCA (Australia) part of the largest animal welfare group in Australia.
The RSPCA (ACT) had a significant input to the proposed Bill and it was therefore disappointing that apart from you we have not been approached to give an opinion or advice on the present issues arising from the Bill. Indeed we learned of the tabling of the Bill from newspaper reports. A similar situation occurred with the Dog Control Act.
So it is relevant, Mr Lamont. Mr Deputy Speaker, I make this point because we have been informed that this lack of consultation occurred with the Dog Control (Amendment) Bill. The RSPCA and the Animal Services Division of the ANU were among those who advised of this. The amendment to the Dog Control Act
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .