Page 1083 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 5 April 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The bill will make it easier to prosecute cruelty cases by replacing the requirement to prove pain with a prohibition on animal neglect and cruelty. This means that the court does not need to determine that the animal was in pain and broadens the scope to include acts of cruelty that may not have caused pain to the animal but were nonetheless cruel.
The bill clarifies the prohibition on cockfighting spurs and other devices that are made or adapted to be attached to an animal which allow the animal to cause injury to another animal.
A new section in this bill allows the court to make an interim order to prohibit a person from purchasing, acquiring, keeping, caring for or controlling an animal. This provision will be used in cases where an animal has been seized from a person and the person is likely to acquire another animal. The current provisions do not allow the court to get involved until a person has acquired another animal and there is suspected neglect or cruelty. This amendment will minimise the risk that people who are at high risk of mistreating animals will have an opportunity to do so. It is expected that these provisions will only be used in the most extreme circumstances.
The bill also allows the court to make an order to recover costs from owners of animals that are seized and require care. The cost of treating and rehabilitating animals that have been seized is often borne by the territory. This amendment would allow the territory to recoup some of these costs. In cases where owners have neglected or mistreated their animals it is not fair that they should then pass the cost of caring for that animal onto the taxpayer. The court will have the discretion to make an order for cost recovery.
In conclusion, I would like to thank the government and the directorate officials, as well as the RSPCA and the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee, for all their work on this bill. The opposition is pleased to support it.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (12.05): The Greens take animal welfare very seriously and have a strong record of action in this area. As a result of the parliamentary agreement, we have banned puppy farming in the ACT and introduced a new sales code so that pets in pet shops are properly looked after. We have also banned battery cage eggs and sow stalls in the territory. The ACT Greens also have a policy of removing government funding for greyhound racing in the ACT to help bring about an end to this practice, which is associated with various animal welfare issues.
This bill is very close to my heart. As the previous Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, I worked hard to get this legislation developed, in consultation with key stakeholders, including the RSPCA and the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee.
The need for this legislation was identified at a roundtable that my office instigated in January 2015 with the RSPCA and various parts of TAMS that had animal welfare responsibilities, including Domestic Animal Services and Parks and Conservation.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video