Page 1469 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 11 August 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
you not say in your policy platform that you were going to move this? Why was it not in the Bill in the first instance? Why did it have to be an amendment? Why do you not take up Mr Stevenson's approach and do a survey? Better still, why do you not have a referendum on it, if you are so certain? I am prepared to make a decent wager for the animal welfare lobby if your Government is prepared to have a referendum.
Madam Speaker, I could go on. Normally I speak from notes, but this got my hackles up so much that I could not help myself. I had to let Mr Lamont know how I really feel about this. I happen to have grown up on the land, to have grown up amongst animals. I know a little about animals. I do not even have a dog or a cat because I feel that it is unfair to them. I might have to go away, and I might have to leave them in the house or lock them up.
That has nothing to do with this Bill. The Bill is completely irrelevant to our discussions here. It is very poorly drafted. It is lacking in precise terminology. What is cruelty? We will be moving an amendment to say what cruelty is. What represents unnecessary pain? Are you going to ask the animal whether it has unnecessary pain? What is undue distress? What is meant by "confine" in relation to game parks? Does it mean a fence around it? What does alleviation of pain mean? Does it mean putting an animal out of its misery by killing it? How would you kill it? What is meant by pain and suffering in relation to the conveyance of animals? What is a medical procedure?
What are the codes of practice? These should be incorporated, where possible, in the Bill, so that we know what we are voting on. A code of practice could actually see Parkwood Eggs closed, pet shops closed, certainly practices pertaining to horseraces stopped, the transport of animals through the ACT prevented, and kennels closed. I could go on. Who will be appointed as inspectors? What will be the membership of the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee? What will happen to circus animals if they are banned or phased out? What compensation will be given to the circus owners, bearing in mind that they have not broken any laws?
These are not the views and concerns only of the Liberal Party; they are the concerns of the majority of organisations involved with animals with which we have consulted. The RSPCA is concerned with the issue. I shall seek leave to table a number of letters afterwards, Madam Speaker. The RSPCA are concerned that they have not been consulted on inspectors. The Australian Bushmen's Campdraft Association have not been consulted at all, and I would like to table a letter on that. Bartter Enterprises is concerned about their livelihood. The Circus Federation of Australia justifiably feel victimised.
The Australian National University's Animal Services Division would like to see annual reports of their activities so that they will be more publicly accountable. They have other concerns about bureaucratic red tape concerning the issue of authorisation certificates. None of that is covered in the Act. Last but not least - and my colleague has already quoted from it - I have a letter from the ACT Racing Club expressing three major concerns. They are: Lack of a definition of cruelty, the reversal of the onus of proof, and exemption for the racing industry. That letter was written by a lawyer. They have concerns about the Bill.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .