Page 872 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 16 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We have spoken to the Australian Professional Rodeo Association and they are naturally very concerned about a proposal to ban rodeos. Mr Ray Blanchard of the association, who incidentally is also a member of the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee of New South Wales, indicated that some time back the association realised that in some aspects of the rodeo they had to lift their game and had since done so. Mr Blanchard, who is also involved in horseracing, verified that the horseracing industry had far more to answer than the Professional Rodeo Association.
The Australian Bushmen's Campdraft and Rodeo Association Ltd has indicated that over the past 12 months the following estimated number of stock were used without an injury to stock reported to their office. This is out of 208 committees conducting rodeos and/or campdrafts. Rodeos - 116 days of rodeo events, 13,200 head of cattle; campdrafts - 218 days, 109,000 head of cattle. The association supervises its events very strictly and heavy fines are imposed for any breaches. If this farming practice is to be banned, what would the Minister be saying about mulesing lambs or, indeed, shearing sheep in the colder months? It all comes down to applying commonsense and not being caught up in emotiveness and getting things out of perspective. Once again, controls and regulation, not hypocrisy.
Probably one of the most important businesses that could be severely affected by this Bill is Parkwood Eggs. The extremists would have the current form of farming move to free-range. This would result in Parkwood requiring 2,000 acres and it would need to employ approximately 500 people instead of those currently employed. The cost of eggs to the consumer could rise to something around $10 a dozen. As for the birds, they are healthier in their current cages. All the birds are checked twice a day by trained chicken handlers. Any sick bird is removed and given a cage on its own and treated or is humanely destroyed. Feed and watering equipment is checked twice daily. The company also employs a veterinarian to establish disease control. Houses are air-conditioned and the temperature ranges from 20 to 26 degrees. The operation at Parkwood is very impressive and is a most important industry to Canberra. It should be permitted to continue its operation; but the vague terms of the Bill provide no comfort to the management, nor does the lack of consultation by the Government, and it is on this point that I would like to conclude.
Madam Speaker, I have come to realise that this Government really does not know how to consult or that it chooses not to. The latter is more likely to be the case. In our process of assessing the Animal Welfare Bill we undertook a fairly exhaustive consultation process with all those organisations that we considered had some involvement in the area. This included active proponents and others. To our amazement, many of them had not seen the Bill, and those who had seen the Bill were concerned that the consultation process that existed with the preparation of the policy statement was now virtually non-existent.
We have discussed this Bill with, and provided copies of it to, Parkwood Eggs, the Royal Agricultural Society, the RSPCA, the Mugga Lane Zoo and the Circus Federation. In addition to this, we have had discussions with the animal welfare section of the John Curtin School of Medical Research, the Australian Veterinary Association and the Australian Wildlife Association. All of these organisations expressed various concerns with the Bill as it stands. I must conclude that, with all my foregoing comments, this is not a document that is thorough enough in its
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .