Page 303 - Week 01 - Thursday, 11 February 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
director of the Liberal Party. There are safeguards. The Domestic Animals Registrar must already hold the information—he has got to already have it—and must be satisfied both that an attack has occurred and that it has resulted in injury or financial loss to an aggrieved person.
Mr Coe: It is fair game. All bets are off.
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, they are not actually, Mr Coe.
MR HARGREAVES: As the registrar is responsible for investigating dog attacks, it will soon be apparent to the registrar if a request for information is not above board.
With pet ownership must come responsibility. If a dog has attacked another animal or harassed someone or caused injuries, it is only reasonable that the owner should be held responsible and pay compensation.
I am pleased to find out from Domestic Animal Services that generally dog owners do the right thing. That is what we expect from a civilised society. But there are some owners of dogs that have been involved in attacks who refuse to pay compensation and who have used the mechanisms in the Freedom of Information Act, which were intended to protect privacy, to frustrate victims from accessing information that could allow them to seek compensation.
I commend the bill for providing aggrieved people with a simple and inexpensive means to access the information held by the registrar. It is consistent with the broader objects of the act to encourage responsible pet ownership. I wonder whether Mr Rattenbury has a puppy upstairs; perhaps and he would like to come down and talk to us about it.
The statutory right to compensation as a result of a dog attack is clear. It is clear in the act. This amendment also makes it clear that the victim has a right to information held by the Domestic Animals Registrar to enable the victim to make a claim for compensation.
To further ensure that the act complies with the Privacy Act’s information privacy principles, I am advised that the dog registration form will be updated and that information will be provided on the department’s website to advise people that their personal information may be disclosed in relation to incidents where their dog has attacked or harassed.
However, as a member of the Legislative Assembly and a former minister responsible for Domestic Animal Services staff, I express my deep concern for their safety and the safety of their families. I agree with the amendment to section 124 to remove the requirement for names to be included on identity cards. In place of their names, a unique identifying number will be inserted. Threats are being made against DAS staff for just doing their job. In some instances threats have been made against their families. This is an unacceptable position, an unacceptable situation. The amendment will address this by giving to the chief executive of the Department of Territory and Municipal Services the power to issue identification cards to DAS staff, without names.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video