Page 1699 - Week 06 - Thursday, 13 August 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR STEVENSON: He would not talk to me about the Belconnen Remand Centre at the time. At this time I ask whether the Minister would be good enough to let me know whether Mr Kaine's proposed amendment to include the racing industry will be beneficial, in that the racing industry - trots, dogs and horses - will be given time to develop a code of practice. I mean not just the local ACT racing industry but nationally. If it seems like I am belabouring the point about the code of practice, it is - - -
Mr Connolly: Who could accuse you of such a thing?
MR STEVENSON: Mr Terry Connolly asks, "Who could accuse you of such a thing?". I have asked it again and again, and still I do not have an answer; that is the only reason that I ask it.
MR WOOD (Minister for Education and Training, Minister for the Arts and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (5.08): Madam Speaker, in a comment a little while ago - I do not think it was answering anything particularly - I indicated that, in the normal course of events, regulations, et cetera, are prepared, and in the case of the Dog Control Act that took about six months. Because the matter had been raised, not because I think there is a problem, I indicated that the egg production industry and the racing industry would develop their codes of practice through the AWAC, and that is the timeframe that I would have in mind.
Mr Stevenson: So they would be allowed to develop the code of practice first.
MR WOOD: That is what I have said.
Amendment agreed to.
Clauses, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 25
MR WESTENDE (5.09): Madam Speaker, I move:
Page 13, subclause (1), line 11, omit "$10,000 or imprisonment for 1 year, or both", substitute "$5,000 or imprisonment for 6 months, or both".
Clause 25 deals again with the penalties, about which enough has been said; but one point especially is:
(1) A person shall not, without a licence, use or breed an animal in or on any premises for the purposes of -
(a) research; or
(b) teaching.
Penalty: $10,000 or imprisonment for 1 year, or both.
It is stated that subclause (1) does not apply to an authorised person. If it is not an authorised person, our question is: Who would want to breed an animal for research or teaching, and is that to mean the frogs that we talked about earlier? Once again, the Act is particularly vague.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .