Page 918 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 30 March 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
level of penalty, no matter how harsh, has a hope of being effective if we have a limited ability to enforce the law in the first place. Madam Speaker, this has been proved over the past few months, during which time very strict measures for dog control have been in place. Serious complaints have continued.
Madam Speaker, I understand that there have been meetings between government and community today to find further ways of tackling this problem. I am pleased that there has been such a quick reaction following this latest terrible incident. I am also pleased to see that government and community can come together to discuss the problems that exist and the options available to solve these problems. I know, as a member of this Government, that we are committed to do whatever we have to do to fix the problem. The members of our community who flout these laws must be brought to task.
Mr Cornwell: Well, why are you up there talking about it?
MS ELLIS: You did not listen to the first part, Mr Cornwell, so you might not understand the second part. I take this opportunity to strongly urge the community to enter into this dialogue in the interest of solving this community problem. I look forward, Madam Speaker, to the day when we can all feel free from attack or from the fear of attack from dogs in the ACT, and I encourage all members of the ACT community to work together towards that goal.
MR WESTENDE (4.43): Madam Speaker, I do not expect that anyone here would disagree with Ms Ellis's sentiments expressed in the MPI today. However, I find it rather curious that a member of the Government would raise this in this way. The best thing for the Government to do is to take action, and it is my impression that Mr Wood is taking those steps. I am particularly pleased to see that Mr Wood is consulting widely on the matter. I believe, from his public statements, that he will be proposing much tighter controls. I also understand that Ms Szuty will soon be proposing her amendments to the Dog Control Act, and I also have some amendments being drafted at this time. In fact I wrote to the Parliamentary Counsel on 15 February asking for amending legislation. So, as I said, I find it rather curious that we now take up this matter on an MPI.
In essence we all ought to do something about the spate of dog bites and attacks, and the difference between us will probably come down to the strength of our response to the problem. Therefore, with the Minister's amendments, Ms Szuty's amendments and my amendments coming before the Assembly, perhaps even this week, it seems rather odd that Ms Ellis would want to attempt to debate the matter today. Is it that she is attempting to steal the thunder from those who have already taken steps to address the issues of this quite complex matter? The only effective way of debating this matter is to put forward a strategic plan that confronts all the issues involved and proposes solutions. All that, I would have thought, will be dealt with in the debate on the amendments to the Dog Control Act.
Ms Ellis: I have not seen the amendments, so I do not know.
MR WESTENDE: I cannot help it if the parliamentary draftsman, since 15 February, has not given me any amendments. If I were in government I would certainly have had them, I can assure you. I have said that I agree with the sentiments of Ms Ellis's MPI, but as to the substance of it I am not so sure.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .