Page 874 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 20 March 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
will do is to provide more up-to-date and better statistics and more current information, so I think this is a very worthy amendment.
MRS KIKKERT (Ginninderra) (4.42): I thank Ms Lawder for bringing this motion before the Assembly today. I rise to speak in full support of it. I speak today as a dog owner. I bring that fact up because sometimes those opposite try to spin that the Liberals’ ongoing concerns over dog attacks in this territory are some kind of dislike for dogs or for the people who own them. Nothing could be further from the truth. For many of us, dogs are a treasured part of our family.
But the facts speak for themselves. The number of dog attacks in this city keeps going up and up. I can assure this Assembly that the Liberals and the media outlets are not the only ones noticing. I spend as much time as I can meeting and speaking with the good people in my electorate of Ginninderra. The absolute failure of this government to adequately and sensibly respond to the threat of dangerous dogs has become one of the top issues raised with me.
Dog owners are concerned. The most common victim in a dog attack is another dog. Even when the victim does not die, it is often left physically and emotionally damaged for the rest of its life. This, of course, creates grief for the family, who love their dog. Those who own other dogs are also concerned. As we learnt from the tragic events of last week, all kinds of animals can fall victim to attacks by dangerous dogs, even animals much larger than the one attacking them. If an alpaca can be fatally wounded by a dangerous dog, cats, bunnies and other more common pets have no hope.
People who have never owned pets are concerned. Constituents who have been attacked or threatened by dangerous dogs have shared with me their stories and their friends’ and neighbours’ stories and begged that more be done. Madam Deputy Speaker, the statistics make it clear that more needs to be done. I understand that this government has grown accustomed to telling Canberrans that it is on top of a problem even when the data clearly show that the problem is rapidly worsening. It is not working any more. People can see for themselves what is really going on.
The ACT government needs to provide the resources needed to ensure that the current dog laws are effectively enforced. It needs to provide the resources needed to ensure that dog attacks are investigated quickly and treated under the law with the urgency and seriousness that the community expects. I commend this motion to the Assembly.
MS LAWDER (Brindabella) (4.44): I would like to thank everyone for their support of the general thrust of my motion today. It was somewhat qualified support in some instances; however, it is good to know that we have some agreement on the majority of the points.
I found it very interesting that Ms Le Couteur referred to emotive language that she would have liked removed in some of the original points of the motion. It was also interesting that she did not have any issue with emotive language in other motions today—for example, an earlier motion which used terms such as “shambolic”, “misguided”, “pork-barrelling” and “devastating”. However, that is perhaps for Ms Le Couteur to ponder. When you give a reason for changing something,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video