Page 4951 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 28 November 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
to note it. Recommendation 28 was to remove barriers—for example, costs—to relinquish dogs. The government’s response was to agree to this recommendation.
The bill I am presenting today encourages responsible dog ownership, responsible management of dogs, and good behaviour of dog owners and dogs. It does three things. There are the two I have mentioned, and we are encouraging dog owners to ensure that their dogs are well trained. When you go to dog training, you are often told that it is more a matter of training the owners than training the dogs. It is important that dog owners understand the principles of responsible dog ownership, the ways to allow your dogs to approach other dogs and people.
One of the things we are including in the legislation today is training to encourage responsible dog ownership. What is in the bill today is that no dog registration fee will be payable if the owner has successfully completed approved training with the dog. That means that each dog must be trained. If the owner gets a second dog, that should also be trained. It is a carrot approach.
We will also encourage people to deal with unwanted dogs. Sometimes people get a dog and it is not quite the temperament that they were looking for or it does not fit into their family lifestyle. For some families, having to pay a fee to relinquish that dog could be a barrier. In those instances, people might keep the dog in their backyard unwanted, unloved and untrained. Potentially, that dog could become a dangerous dog through lack of attention and lack of training. By encouraging people to relinquish those dogs without a fee being payable, especially if those dogs are dangerous or have the temperament to be dangerous, we are discouraging families and people from keeping those dogs. We are removing the barriers.
At the other end of the spectrum, this bill proposes to double the fee for dangerous dog licences. Under the current legislation, people can keep dogs that are deemed to be dangerous under certain conditions. We want to make sure that people consider that very carefully. This is an example of a stick approach, as opposed to the carrot approach. The bill doubles the fee to keep or retain a dangerous dog. This may be a deterrent for some owners to take that dog back to their home, back into the community and, potentially, it being a danger to other members of the community.
Last year there were 485 reports of dog attacks, an increase of 25 per cent from the previous year. Over the past five years we have seen, on average, a 30 per cent increase year on year of reported dog attacks. This is an increase in Canberra residents being injured by dogs, being frightened and terrorised by dogs. It also means that other dogs are attacked, maimed or killed by dogs. It is not only dogs. It is also cats and other domestic pets that can be terrorised, injured or killed by roaming dogs.
I ask members to look at the comparison in two sets of figures. We have had a 30 per cent increase year on year over five years, or a 422 per cent increase from five years ago. Comparatively, over five years we have seen a slight decrease in the number of fines for dog offences in public places. We are seeing a crisis on one hand and a lack of response on the other.
Accordingly, it would appear that more needs to be done to keep Canberrans safe. This is a basic duty of government. This is one of the things that this bill is trying to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video