Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 9 Hansard (3 September) . . Page.. 2809 ..

MS HORODNY (continuing):

I would argue with Mr Moore. I do not believe that that is what the group did. I believe they targeted particular members of the Assembly because this is where they felt there was a stalemate on this issue, and indeed there was for a long time. That is understandable, because I believe members had to do their research, come up with their own information and form a view on all of this. It certainly has not been easy. I am very glad that we have had a very healthy and robust debate today. There have been a lot of issues to cover in this Bill. There is the whole issue of the welfare of animals, the best housing systems for animals, cannibalism and debeaking. I think we have all become experts on hens in the last couple of years. I certainly feel that I have learnt a lot more about hens than I probably wanted to know.

Ms Tucker touched on ethics and standards and where as a society we decide to draw the line. Ms Tucker used the example of sweatshops. It is the example that I was going to use, but I will not. If we really feel that the price of a product is the most important thing and that the way we produce that product is unimportant, then as a society we could decide in that case that all kindergarten children should spend one day of each week producing rugs, as child slave labour does in parts of the Third World.

That is obviously not something that we are going to do. It is not a standard that we are prepared to accept. We have moved beyond that. We are a civilised society, and I am very glad that this Assembly has decided to up the standard of this Assembly and reflect the wishes of the community. I believe this Bill will go a long way towards changing the standard of intensive farming in other States as well. I thank members for their support.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Clause 1 agreed to.

Clause 2

MR CORBELL (12.15): Mr Speaker, I move:

Page 1, line 9, subclause 2(2), omit the subclause, substitute the following subclause:

"(2) Sections 4 and 5 commence at the expiration of a period of 6 years after the date on which subsection 24A(1) of the Food Act 1992 is, or provisions of that Act that include that subsection are, described in Schedule 2 to the Mutual Recognition Act 1992 of the Commonwealth.".

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .