Page 5295 - Week 14 - Thursday, 19 November 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
representations from the fireworks industry and lobby have been any less vocal or active than groups such as the RSPCA.
I would like to read some of the information from the RSPCA’s response to the fireworks policy statement of February 2009 in relation to the impact on the RSPCA’s workload of the fireworks weekend:
With a threefold increase in workload on the weekend in question and increased workload following the weekend, resources simply cannot keep pace with demand. In 2008 demand on the Monday was so strong that our telephone system malfunctioned as a result of incoming calls.
Additionally during this time RSPCA ACT resources are directed away from the proper care and assistance to people attending our centre for regular business interactions.
In relation to the number of dogs that end up at the RSPCA on the June weekend, the average number of adult dogs presenting to the RSPCA in each month is 86; in June the average increases to 106, representing a 23 per cent increase in workload.
I would also like to note another noticeable inconsistency in the Liberal Party’s stance on fireworks, apart from the fact that, as we have already heard, they have consistently supported a ban over a number of periods of the Legislative Assembly. This is that they claim to be supporters of the RSPCA. Mr Seselja and other Liberal members even attended an RSPCA wildlife breakfast not so long ago where the fireworks ban was discussed and was recognised as a great achievement for the RSPCA and something which they were very pleased with and were encouraging members to still support. Yet the Liberals have moved this disallowance, which is directly against the policy and position of the RSPCA and ignores the evidence they have presented on many occasions.
As has already been noted on a number of occasions, the Liberal Party have been great and vocal supporters of a ban on consumer fireworks over a number of Assemblies. I refer to a speech by Mr Steve Pratt in 2004 when he stated:
The amendments are straightforward: they ban the sale of consumer fireworks to the public all year round. This is another bid by the Liberal opposition to protect the community and their pets from disturbance and danger. Against the general concern of community safety and generally disruptive behaviour and property damage, complaints about fireworks top the list of concerns that I and my colleagues have received, and are continually receiving, over 2½ years.
I do not think this has changed at all. The question has to be asked: what has changed and why, after all this time when the Liberal Party have called for and tried themselves to pass a ban, are they now not supporting the ban? There is no rhyme or reason to their stance and, while I agree with statements made by Mrs Dunne that, yes, it is important to have the debate, what is the reason behind their sudden change in position? Did the Liberal Party go to their members and decision-making bodies and change their policy on banning fireworks? Was there fair and open debate on this?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video