Page 1887 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 16 June 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Madam Speaker, this Bill will require that all dangerous dogs must wear a muzzle when in public places. Dangerous dogs, by definition, are prone to attack and, as such, the keepers of such animals must take precautions to prevent this from happening. The public must be free to move around without fear of dangerous dogs. You often see cases where people are not game to enter a shop because a dangerous looking dog is sitting at the entrance. Parents walking their children down the street should not fear walking past somebody leading a dangerous dog. But how often do you see a child reach out to pat a dog that is near to them?
Madam Speaker, a muzzle on dangerous dogs may seem an overreaction, but I would prefer this to even one attack on a young person who could be scarred physically and emotionally for life. Quite apart from this, greyhound dogs are already required to be muzzled. Madam Speaker, dogs attacking or worrying people or animals must simply be stopped. I believe that this can be done with more responsible ownership. However, through this Bill the penalty for dog attacks will be dramatically increased from $1,000 to $10,000. This community simply cannot tolerate vicious dog attacks.
Madam Speaker, to show that I have looked at this matter fairly, I acknowledge that some people have little to no tolerance of dogs and, as such, can go out of their way to make life difficult for keepers of dogs. To that extent, it is possible for people to have a dog impounded on suspicion of an attack - I repeat, on suspicion of an attack - simply to get it out of the way. This Bill, therefore, provides that where the registrar or the court finds an action to be frivolous the person who instituted the proceedings will bear the costs of impounding the dog.
One of the weakest aspects of dog control in the ACT is the number of unregistered dogs. I understand that this is one of the major areas that the Minister will address following the working party report. However, it is my belief that if all unregistered dogs found roaming the streets were destroyed on capture more people would have their dogs registered. This Bill provides for this course of action as one of the options open to an inspector.
Madam Speaker, in essence, this Bill is signalling to people that owning a dog carries considerable responsibilities. People who are contemplating owning a dog must simply think through all aspects of keeping a dog and, because all dogs can bite, they must consider the safety of other people. Madam Speaker, without apology, this Bill is definitely based on the premise that human life and well-being far outrank those of dogs. However, I am a strong believer in kindness to animals as well, and surely we can strike a balance between protecting people and caring for dogs. Madam Speaker, I present the Dog Control (Amendment) Bill (No. 2) for consideration by this house.
Debate (on motion by Mr Wood) adjourned.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .