Page 869 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 16 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
small aquarium. It is interesting that the Government has singled out circus animals but has not come clean about its views on battery-fed poultry animals. It is curious that the Bill would allow the release of domestic cats; yet cats are devouring our wildlife in the order of some 78 million items per year.
Madam Speaker, the Bill is loaded with generalities and quite vague terminology. Our concern with this is that the interpretation of these vague terms and the intentions will be left for the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee and the Animal Welfare Unit to determine. Once given the power through what will become the Animal Welfare Act, these bodies will then, and only then, go about defining the very things we and a great many people and organisations and businesses in the ACT are wanting to know now. What is meant by "cruelty", "unnecessary pain", "confined animals"? What is acceptable conveyance of animals? What is humane transport of animals - the back seat of the car or in air-conditioned buses? What is adequate shelter? How can someone always know that an animal is unfit for a particular purpose such as riding or working, et cetera? The Bill outlines the areas that the codes of practice will deal with; but it does not indicate what these will be, and to that extent the Bill is an unknown quantity.
The Minister in introducing the Bill stated that the Bill will detail specific requirements for people to treat animals appropriately. The problem here, Minister, is that the Bill is not detailed and no-one knows what you mean by "treat appropriately". Probably it would be fair to say that once we would have understood what you are meaning, but with the rise of the animal liberation movement one can never be sure what the terminology really means. This movement has a very extreme agenda to ultimately eliminate all use of animals for work, for pleasure and for food and clothing. They would have animals as humans and as equals. That is a rather bizarre and off-the-planet perspective of life. In fact, from a Christian perspective it is in defiance of creation.
Debate interrupted.
ADJOURNMENT
MADAM SPEAKER: Order! It being 9.30 pm, I propose the question:
That the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr Berry: I require the question to be put forthwith without debate.
Question resolved in the negative.
ANIMAL WELFARE BILL 1992
Debate resumed.
MR WESTENDE: We do not know whether the lunatic fringe will gain more control and will have more say in the determination of the regulations. A further major concern we have in this area of uncertainty is the question of inspectors. The Bill gives incredible powers to inspectors; in fact, in some aspects more than the police have. I speak here of the right to enter premises without a warrant.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .