Page 1700 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 9 May 2018

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


Ms Colless also contacted my office and I wrote to the minister on 29 March asking about urgent finalisation of the investigation and why there had been such a delay in responding to Ms Colless.

It would come as no surprise to anyone on this side of the chamber that, after our motion referring to Ms Colless appeared on the notice paper, yesterday at 4 pm Ms Colless was called by an employee of DAS. Ms Colless tells me this is the first time DAS has initiated a call. She was told that two of the stray dogs that had entered her property and killed her cat had been put down. The DAS member could not tell her when that had happened or what else would happen but that the owners would “probably be fined”. The DAS member could not say why she had not been informed earlier. As of close of business yesterday, 8 May, over five months after the attack, there had been no letter to Ms Colless or to me from the minister. Ms Colless was told on the phone by DAS yesterday, when asked about the letter, “We could probably manage that.”

I am reminded of these comments by the minister in this Assembly on 29 March last year in response to Mr Doszpot:

I am pleased to advise that in the past 12 months there has been a renewed focus of Domestic Animal Services staff on customer service and communication, especially the importance of keeping victims of dog attacks informed on the progress and outcomes of investigations.

It has been over a year since that assurance in this place to Mr Doszpot, and it was five months after the attack on this poor women’s cat that this victim was informed of the progress of the investigation, despite the minister’s assurances that there was a renewed focus on customer service and communication, especially the importance of keeping victims informed.

It is important that none of what I have said should be taken as a criticism of the hardworking staff of DAS. In fact we regularly get very positive reports about their compassion, their professionalism and their empathy for victims. It is a tough job. These hardworking public servants have to deal with gruesome and distressing scenes. They have to console grieving pet owners. They have to deal with their own emotions when animals have to be put down. They have to deal with the owners of those pets being put down. They will also be grieving. It is not a job many of us would seek out or be happy to do. This is hard. It is a tough job.

My concerns here are not anti dog. I am a dog lover and a dog owner. I know most dog owners love their pets and are responsible, and I would suggest that there are probably no bad dogs, just a small number of thoughtless and perhaps irresponsible dog owners.

The point of this motion is that we believe that, despite many platitudinous speeches the minister and the government have made, they still have not taken the matter of dangerous dogs seriously. We see there are lengthy delays in addressing dog attack issues. We see that victims of dog attacks will wait ridiculously long times for


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