Page 701 - Week 02 - Thursday, 25 February 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
ensure the standards and guidelines it contains are able to be legally enforced. I should advise the Assembly that there is some debate nationally about the terminology applied to these codes and ultimately what we call the codes may change. However, for the time being the ACT will retain the working terminology of codes of practice and mandatory codes of practice.
The power contained in this bill will allow the minister to declare all or part of a code of practice mandatory. The declaration of a mandatory code of practice will be a disallowable instrument.
This bill will also require the minister to consult before making a mandatory code of practice. Many people have animals in their care and should be offered the opportunity to provide their views, as animal welfare stakeholders, on whether a code of practice, or parts of it, should be mandatory. Consultation can increase understanding of animal welfare issues, improve relations with stakeholders, and improve trust in government and industry. It is expected that this will lead to better animal welfare outcomes.
It is also important that consultation is undertaken before making a code mandatory because it will be an offence to fail to comply with a requirement of a mandatory code of practice. Two offences of failing to comply are proposed, taking a two-tiered approach. The first offence is a fault element offence, where the prosecution will need to prove the person recklessly failed to comply with a requirement of a mandatory code of practice. The second offence is a strict liability offence.
The requirement for consultation will be an integral part of the development of mandatory codes of practice. While consultation at the national level is necessary, the government considers it important that Canberrans also have an opportunity to offer their views. This requirement for consultation builds on the requirement in the act for the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee to participate in the development and recommendation of codes of practice.
The act already requires non-mandatory codes to be published and this requirement will be extended to new mandatory codes. In addition to the requirement to consult and to publish a mandatory code of practice, the operation of the strict liability offence will also be subject to special arrangements where an offender might not reasonably be expected to know of his or her obligations under a code. Typically, this might be individuals not involved in a business or industry to which a mandatory code ordinarily applies.
In such cases, the requirements of new section 24C will apply. Where the person is reasonably suspected by an animal welfare inspector, or an authorised officer, of breaching a code, the person must first be served with a written direction to rectify the breach. They must be told how they have breached the code and given a reasonable time to comply. The person only commits an offence if they fail to comply with that direction within the stipulated time. This will ensure that the person is made aware of the existence of the mandatory code.
This bill is the first step to be taken to bring about nationally consistent implementation in animal welfare regulation. The government will be working
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video