Page 2570 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 24 August 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR STEFANIAK: In 1992 a Bill was introduced in this Assembly. That Bill, after considerable amendment, ultimately became law. That Bill, when it first went before the house, did not make any reference to exotic animals. I understand that the provisions banning certain exotic animals from circuses were inserted by amendments moved by the Deputy Chief Minister, who was then a backbench member. The effect of those amendments was to ban circuses from Canberra. To my knowledge, we have not had one here since.
Mr Lamont: False. That is misleading. The Flying Fruitfly Circus and Circus Oz have been here repeatedly.
MR STEFANIAK: On page 4 of the Animal Welfare Act - - -
Mr Lamont: The Flying Fruit Flies have been here. It is a great circus. The Liberal Party AGM is a great circus.
MR STEFANIAK: The Labor Party conference is a great circus. You are probably right there, Mr Lamont. There have certainly been a few activities in Canberra that could be classed as circuses. However, Mr Lamont's amendments and the 1992 Act have effectively banned certain circus animals from Canberra. A prohibited circus animal is defined as a bear, cheetah, elephant, giraffe, leopard, lion, puma or tiger, or an animal prescribed under section 52. It is interesting that technically a cross between a lion and a tiger, for example - I forget the term for it - could slip through the net. There are a number of other provisions in the Act which arose from Mr Lamont's amendments. Subsection 51(3) states:
A person shall not conduct a circus using a prohibited circus animal.
There is a penalty provision.
Mr Lamont: Madam Speaker, I raise a point of order. I believe that Mr Stefaniak, in addressing this matter, is reflecting on a vote of this Assembly. They are not "Mr Lamont's amendments". They, in fact, are provisions in legislation endorsed by the Assembly.
MR STEFANIAK: They were in your Bill. You introduced them, and they are now law which we are trying to repeal.
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Stefaniak, I am sure that you are well aware of the provisions about alluding to votes. Please continue.
MR STEFANIAK: Subsection 51(4) also makes it an offence for a person to import a prohibited circus animal into the Territory as part of a circus troupe, whether or not for the purpose of using the animal in a circus, and again penalty provisions apply. That, of course, relates to transportation through the Territory. We saw the effect of that when the Great Moscow Circus performed in Queanbeyan in May of this year. I understand that some of my colleagues went to see it.
Mr Lamont: Yes; was that the elephant they had to shoot in Honolulu?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .