Page 1085 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 5 April 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The bill amends the powers of inspectors and authorised officers to clarify an area of uncertainty and provide a power to enforce court orders. Under these provisions, inspectors and authorised officers will have the power to seize dependent offspring of a seized animal and to seize an animal where the inspector or authorised officer believes that the animal is kept in contravention of an interim or other order.
New sections bring the act up to date with template powers exercised by authorised officers in equivalent circumstances under other territory legislation. These amendments will facilitate a more effective framework for the welfare and protection of animals and provide an essential safety measure for inspectors and authorised officers performing their functions under the act.
The court will be able to make an interim order, where appropriate, that a person must not purchase, keep or control any animal within a stated period. The interim order will be available in limited circumstances where an animal has been seized from a person, proceedings commenced and the court is satisfied that unless an appropriate order is in place, the person is likely to engage in conduct that will result in the seizure of an animal or a further proceeding to be started for an offence. This amendment aims to prevent further offences and ensure the welfare and protection of any animals that may be acquired following a seizure and prior to the determination of any charges.
An amendment also allows the court at the time of sentencing to make an order that a person must not purchase or acquire, keep, care for or control any animal within a stated period. This order can be made where the court has convicted a person of animal welfare offences and is satisfied that the person would be likely to commit a further animal welfare offence.
New sections will allow a court in specific circumstances to make an order in relation to the payment to the territory of expenses incurred in the care of animals. This amendment responds to an increasing, unintended trend where owners who are alleged to have committed animal welfare offences are indirectly being permitted to shift the costs of their animals’ care, treatment and rehabilitation to the territory and, therefore, the community. The amended provisions are consistent with the Domestic Animals Act 2000, which provides that an owner of an animal seized under animal nuisance provisions is responsible for any costs or expenses incurred by the territory for seizing or impounding the animal.
Madam Assistant Speaker, this bill is important in protecting the welfare, safety and health of animals and ensuring proper and humane care and management. It improves clarity in the legislation. It improves definitions. It means that the RSPCA and Domestic Animal Services, as the two agencies in the territory with key responsibility for monitoring the welfare of animals and enforcing the provisions of the Animal Welfare Act and other key statutory obligations, are able to do their job more effectively. The construct of the law is clearer. It will ensure that where a prosecution is necessary, that prosecution has greater chance of success and it is less likely that somebody will be able to use legal wrangling to get themselves out of a clear breach of animal welfare duties. I think that this will ensure that the agencies that we entrust to monitor and protect animals in the ACT will be able to more effectively do their job. I am pleased to support this bill today.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video