Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 11 Hansard (28 November) . . Page.. 3342 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

It does raise the question of the RSPCA. It also raises the question of whether or not government is the best and only organisation that can provide this service. For instance, the RSPCA currently provide us with animal welfare officer services. Those animal officers have been called to places like Parkwood and asked to investigate suspected breaches of legislation. We believe it is reasonable to empower people other than public servants to be the deputy registrar, and therefore we will oppose this amendment.

MR CORBELL (5.39): There is a significant difference between an individual working for a non-profit body like the RSPCA performing these functions and a person working for a private company on contract performing these functions. There are recognised examples across a range of legislation of the territory that provide for individuals who represent organisations akin to the RSPCA to perform these types of functions. The Labor Party has no difficulty with that, and we welcome the involvement of the RSPCA previously and in the future in relation to some of the responsibilities under this legislation and under the Animal Welfare Act. Those responsibilities should be maintained. I would encourage the minister to put forward amendments that deal with that particular provision.

It is quite clear from the explanatory memorandum that this provision does not necessarily deal with the RSPCA, even though the minister raises it now in his speech. It deals with the potential for outsourcing, and that is not an acceptable approach to the delivery of government services in this regard. The minister should accept that and put in place some provisions that deal with those other circumstances which he has outlined.

Question put:

That the amendment (Ms Tucker's ) be agreed to.

The Assembly voted-

Ayes, 7		Noes, 8

Mr Berry  	Ms Carnell
Mr Corbell  	Mr Cornwell
Mr Hargreaves  	Mr Hird
Mr Kaine   	Mr Moore
Mr Quinlan  	Mr Osborne
Mr Stanhope  	Mr Rugendyke
Ms Tucker  	Mr Smyth
 		Mr Stefaniak

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

Clause 122 agreed to.

Clause 123.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .