Page 531 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 20 February 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
was being mauled by a stray dog in Ngunnawal recently. She said, “I was the most traumatised I had ever been in my life.”
Another example was reported on 6 December in the Canberra Times:
Domestic Animal Services has confirmed it is investigating a serious dog attack in Kambah that left a small dog cowering in its own backyard with severe puncture wounds.
On 21 December 2018 there was a post:
My three-and-a-half-year-old granddaughter was riding her little balance bike along the footpath in front of the Burns Club, Kambah, bordering the oval, around 11 am this morning. She was only metres in front of her mother when three roaming dogs ran at her. The biggest one bit her on the bottom.
Et cetera. On 31 December:
This morning my wife and two children went for a walk. My wife was bitten by one of two Maltese Terriers, caramel and white, along a particular street in Crace. Someone came out and grabbed both dogs.
There are many examples. Social media is full of them. But since the Maxwell report in April last year, what has happened?
We can make these amendments work. In the past when we used to pay an annual registration fee you would pay your fee, then go to classes. The following year, when you went to pay your registration fee, you could get a discount on your registration when you produced the certificate from the dog training class. This could work if annual registration is brought in again. Otherwise there could be other ways of ensuring a rebate to people who complete the registration. This is not an insurmountable problem; it is a problem that could have been addressed with some amendments from the government, instead of them sticking their heads in the sand and ignoring this health and welfare and animal welfare issue that we have in Canberra.
I have asked for information about fines for dogs, about waiving fees et cetera to get information to base our proposed legislation on. In many cases the response I get is not at all helpful. For example, I asked a question about waiving fees, question on notice 1686. The answer was, “I am advised that the historical information requested”—over the past five years—“is not in an easily retrievable form and may not be available.”
In the answer to question 1580 about dog attacks and how many dogs had been seized or held by DAS, how many had been previously held or seized in relation to dangerous dog licence, the answer to my question 3 was, “I have been advised by my directorate that the information is not in an easily retrievable form”—et cetera.
Question 1683 was about the number of dog attacks, how many of those attacks on humans and domestic animals were previously known to DAS, how many dogs had
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video