Page 5636 - Week 15 - Thursday, 10 December 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Title read by Clerk.
MR STANHOPE (Ginninderra—Chief Minister, Minister for Transport, Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, Minister for Business and Economic Development, Minister for Land and Property Services, Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs and Minister for the Arts and Heritage) (10.06): I move:
That this bill be agreed to in principle.
This bill seeks to amend the Domestic Animals Act 2000. That act regulates the keeping of domestic animals in the ACT. The act establishes the Office of Domestic Animals Registrar, who is given the power to investigate attacks and incidents of harassment involving domestic animals. The bill addresses two areas of concern identified by the registrar in the operation of the act. The opportunity is also being taken to update terminology used in the act.
The first area of concern relates to the operation of section 55 of the act. That section provides that a keeper of a dog must compensate a person injured by, or who suffers damaged caused by, their dog. We all know the devastation that is felt when a family pet is attacked, not to mention the cost of the vet bills following the attack. Generally, the majority of owners of offending dogs that have been involved in attacks willingly provide their names and addresses to other parties without the involvement of the registrar or authorised officers. However, a small minority of dog owners refuse to provide their names to victims, thwarting their ability to obtain compensation for their injury or loss.
It may be interesting for members to note that, in any year, officers from the Domestic Animal Service investigate several hundred complaints involving dogs. A number of these incidents involve attacks that have resulted in injuries to people or to other animals. Where an incident involving a domestic animal has been reported to the registrar and an investigation is carried out by an authorised officer, the identity of the owner of the offending dog may become known to the officers, either through their inquiries or by recourse to details kept on the ACT domestic animals register.
At present, where members of the public request access to identifying information, they are directed to use the Freedom of Information Act. Such requests are generally refused, given the interplay between the Privacy Act and the Freedom of Information Act. Under the Privacy Act, information privacy principle No 11 allows the department to release information if, among other things, the consent of the person concerned is obtained or if the release is authorised by law. This amendment will provide clear legislative authority for the release of the relevant information.
The intention of this aspect of the bill is to provide aggrieved people with a simple and inexpensive means to access information held by the registrar to enable them to seek compensation. This is consistent with the broader objects of the act to encourage responsible pet ownership. It is not proposed to give this right of access to details to everyone, only to those who have suffered as a result of a dog attack or harassment. The right will be limited to situations where the registrar is satisfied both that an attack has occurred and that it has resulted in injury or financial loss to the aggrieved
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video