Get Involved - Parliament

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment (Prohibitions for Convicted Persons) Bill 2022

Published on: November 2022

Record: HANSARD-1323879322-129504

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment (Prohibitions for Convicted Persons) Bill 2022

Second Reading Speech

Mr ALEX GREENWICH (Sydney) (09:48:59):

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I am proud to introduce the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment (Prohibitions for Convicted Persons) Bill 2022 on behalf of the Animal Justice Party. The bill will protect animals from known animal abusers. Owning or working with animals is not a universal right. Animals are vulnerable to human treatment and are at risk in the care of the wrong person. We have all heard horrible animal cruelty stories, and we expect our laws to prevent the perpetrators involved from having animals in their care again. But there are holes in existing laws that allow known abusers to continue to run or work in animal businesses or to keep animals. In introducing the bill, the Hon. Emma Hurst in the Legislative Council informed the House of real-life cases where people committed horrific acts of cruelty but continued to be permitted to have animals—and sometimes large numbers of animals—in their care in this State.

She told the story of a petting zoo owner who stabbed a dog with a pitchfork six times, left her for some time with the pitchfork inside her, then later hung her from a tree and bashed her head with a mallet. The man was charged with serious animal cruelty but continues to be involved in at least four zoos and petting zoos and is involved with animal acquisitions and the care of animals retired from the Stardust Circus. A man and his daughter ran a puppy farm where over 400 dogs were kept on wet concrete floors covered in faecal matter. Following their conviction of 18 animal cruelty offences, they continued to run a puppy farm with over 100 dogs. A man who was convicted of animal cruelty in Victoria was banned from running a breeding business for 10 years, but now lawfully runs a puppy farm in New South Wales. A woman convicted of cruelty for violently swinging a cat around to attack a dog can lawfully keep cats. The current situation is failing to protect animals and is not meeting community expectations and standards.

This bill will stop known abusers from having animals in their care through a number of measures. It will create a presumption that a court will make a disqualification order—that is, a ban on having animals in one's care—if a person is convicted of a serious or aggravated animal cruelty offence, unless there are special circumstances. Currently, the court would have to be satisfied that the convicted person would likely commit another animal cruelty offence in the future. Prohibition orders against keeping an animal that have been issued in other States or Territories would have automatic effect in New South Wales, removing the need for existing laborious processes where the Minister has to approve the ban and serve the individual with a new order. Similarly, convictions for serious animal cruelty or bestiality offences in other States or Territories would be subject to lifetime bans on owning or working with animals in this State, as they are for convictions made here.

The bill will create a new offence if someone convicted of an animal cruelty offence breeds animals or becomes involved in a breeding business, with animal welfare enforcement officers having the power to seize animals kept in contravention to orders. Lastly, the bill will make it an offence for a person who runs a zoo, petting zoo or circus to knowingly hire someone who has been charged or convicted of an animal cruelty offence. I again congratulate the Hon. Emma Hurst and the Animal Justice Party on delivering legislative reform that will reduce animal suffering. The bill does not fix every problem with our animal cruelty laws but it will go a long way to protecting animals from known abusers, helping us to become a more humane society. I commend the bill to the House.

Second Reading Debate

Mr DUGALD SAUNDERS (DubboMinister for Agriculture, and Minister for Western New South Wales) (09:53:22):

— I contribute to debate on the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment (Prohibition for Convicted Persons) Bill 2022 and I thank the member for Sydney for his contribution. I will make my position very clear from the outset. I, along with all members on this side of the House, am an extremely strong supporter of robust animal welfare legislation in New South Wales. The New South Wales Government has remained focused and committed to work towards delivering a modern, streamlined, fit-for-purpose animal welfare legislation framework. We are all aware of the community's high expectations regarding animal welfare legislation and the importance that community members place on the treatment of animals in this State. That is why the New South Wales Government has been working to develop new animal welfare legislation to protect all animals right across New South Wales.

Earlier I mentioned that I had some concerns with the bill in its original form, despite its admirable intentions and its absolutely clear headline message. Nobody has been opposed to the key point that animal cruelty is not to be tolerated and that offenders that commit heinous acts against animals should lose privileges relating to the care of animals. But concerns have been expressed about the execution of parts of the bill. I do not say that to point fingers, but it is the simple reality that making big changes—although they may be fundamental to a piece of legislation that has been in place since 1979 and has been patched up with amendments many times since—is extremely difficult. The bill is complex. The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act [POCTAA] itself is complex. As was noted in the Legislative Council, the making of amendments necessary to refine this bill were also really complex.

I think we have got there in the end and the bill in its current form delivers on the objective of the legislation around animal cruelty and does so without creating unacceptable risks of unintended consequences, which were in the original bill. In its current form, the bill is reasonable. The Legislative Council has worked through the worst of the unintended consequences and its amendments have significantly improved the bill. I still hold reservations about some aspects of the bill and its incorporation into what I think we can all agree is a piece of legislation that needs a full update. I note the good work that has been done in the other place to mitigate the issues that were apparent in this bill in its original form, and I thank everyone who has been a part of that process. The version before us today is a significant improvement on the original iteration. The amendments made in the other place are sensible and considered. They mitigate the risks of disproportionate and unintended outcomes arising as a result of the bill. Once again, I commend all of those involved in the development of the bill and the cooperative approach that we have taken to pass it. I commend the bill to the House.

Ms JENNY AITCHISON (Maitland) (09:56:30):

On behalf of the Labor Opposition, I contribute to debate on the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment (Prohibition for Convicted Persons) Bill 2022. The bill amends the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and the Exhibited Animals Protection Act to prohibit persons convicted of certain offences in relation to animals from caring for or working with animals. At the outset, I refer to the speech of the shadow Minister for Agriculture in the Legislative Council. I thank the Hon. Mick Veitch for his long, continued and consistent advocacy on the prevention of cruelty to animals and in upgrading the Act. I have to say it was a display of breathtaking arrogance when in this place the Minister talked about patched‑up and piecemeal approaches to the amendments to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act over the past 12 years because, through a succession of agriculture Ministers, nothing has been done by this Government. The Government has had the power to make these changes well before now but has failed to do so over years, despite its promises to do so.

It is the truth, universally acknowledged in this Parliament and across the community, that the current legislative framework in New South Wales does not address community expectations around the care and protection of animals. Labor had concerns with the bill, and the upper House provided its capacity to look at those amendments to ensure the bill is workable. The intention of the bill is definitely in line with current community standards. I thank the Hon. Emma Hurst for bringing the bill to the upper House. It makes sense that those who have been convicted of serious animal cruelty should be prohibited from owning, breeding or working with animals, but there have been concerns about how that works. Like so many amendments to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act [POCTAA], this bill has arisen from joint select committees, the puppy farm bill and inquiries of this Parliament over many years, where people have said time after time if a person has been convicted of serious animal cruelty, they should not be allowed to have animals. As the member for Sydney said, it is a privilege, not a right, to own animals.

The Opposition supports the bill on the basis of the important amendments that were passed through the upper House during debate on the legislation to make it more workable, particularly the provisions relating to farmers. We have seen time and again in natural disasters that have beset our State where farmers have made every reasonable attempt to obtain food and water for their livestock during droughts or to keep them safe during floods but could not do so. If they are charged and found guilty, they would have been captured by the bill in its original form. I do not believe that was the intention. There are also issues around working dogs and their training. These issues have been addressed by the upper House amendments. I am pleased to say that with those amendments, Labor will support the bill. Community expectation is that if someone commits aggravated animal cruelty, they lose their right to work with, breed or care for animals, and this bill addresses those concerns. Animal cruelty is not acceptable. I call on the Government as a priority to review the POCTAA as one of its first issues if it is lucky enough to form government next year. After 12 long years of this Government, with all its promises to change the Act and its failure to do so, it does not deserve another chance.

Ms JENNY LEONG (Newtown) (10:00:02):

I contribute to debate on the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment (Prohibitions for Convicted Persons) Bill 2022. At the outset I acknowledge how wonderful it is to enact legislative changes to protect animals in this State, particularly to prevent cruelty to animals. We have heard that genuine commitment from the member for Maitland, my Greens colleague in the other place Ms Abigail Boyd, the Hon. Emma Hurst and the member for Sydney. We have also spoken about the rights and privileges of those who own animals. I put The Greens commitment on record. As many in this place have said, we do not have the right to own an animal, it is a privilege, and with that comes a lot of responsibility. We expect people to behave in good ways, but we also require governments to legislate to ensure that those who do inflict cruelty and harm to animals are held to account.

The object of the bill is to amend the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979 and the Exhibited Animals Protection Act 1986 to prohibit persons convicted of certain offences in relation to animals from caring for or working with animals. The bill increases prohibitions on owning, breeding and working with animals for people convicted of animal cruelty offences. It requires, rather than allows, a court to make a disqualification order to disqualify persons from owning animals if they have been convicted of an animal cruelty offence unless special circumstances justify not making that order. It ensures that interstate prohibition orders operate automatically in New South Wales so that people who have been banned from having an animal in another State are subject to the same restrictions here. It also prohibits a person convicted of a serious interstate animal offence from owning or working with animals, in line with the existing ban for people convicted of offences in New South Wales. It also prohibits a person convicted of an animal cruelty offence from breeding animals or being involved in a business relating to breeding animals.

The horrific stories we have heard articulated in debate on the bill in the other place show how confronting the reality is. I turn to one example raised by my Greens colleague Ms Abigail Boyd in her second reading speech. Under our current legislation, someone who was convicted of 18 animal cruelty offences was allowed to run a puppy farm with 100 dogs as part of a mass breeding program in New South Wales. It is clear to all of us that someone who is convicted of animal cruelty offences and banned in one State could simply drive across the border and start a new puppy farm operation in New South Wales and inflict that same cruelty until they are found and proven to have inflicted that cruelty. That is cause for serious concern.

People who inflict cruelty on animals, whether it be in puppy farms or other operations, do so with complete disregard for the concept that animals are sentient beings, for the concept of animal welfare and for the need to care for other living things in society. That goes to the heart of our values. The issue we are debating is that certain people put profit motives and their own vested interests over and above the interests and welfare of animals. They are happy to inflict cruelty on animals to increase their profits and their standing or connections in certain communities. That really is cause for concern, and the legislation before us will seek to overturn that. It is very important for members to recognise that in a number of instances we have made genuinely good and sensible improvements to legislation in New South Wales as a result of the collaborative, engaging policy work and thinking of members of the crossbench in this Chamber and in the other place.

Last night the member for Balmain, my Greens colleague, secured an amendment to an important piece of Government legislation. Today we are debating a bill that is a result of the work of crossbench member the Hon. Emma Hurst in the other place. The kingmaker, the member for Sydney, has been successful—I say that with a level of sarcasm and I cringe at the use of the term, though I have much respect for the member for Sydney—because there is genuine recognition of the growing crossbench and its power to make changes that reflect the will and interests of the community. I hope we see more of that in the Chamber, not less. I hope this is the start of something big, so that the interests of the community, the people we represent and the animals we are responsible for are put front and centre and at the heart of what we do in these Chambers. We saw that recently, as the power of the crossbench has grown. I look forward to many more opportunities to continue to do that in the interests of animals, people, the community and, ultimately, our State.

Ms FELICITY WILSON (North Shore) (10:06:57):

I speak in support of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment (Prohibitions for Convicted Persons) Bill 2022. I state from the outset my support for the individuals involved in bringing the bill before the House today, particularly the member for Sydney, who has carriage of the bill in this place, and the Hon. Emma Hurst in the other place, who has worked at length to ensure we protect the rights of animals and to reassure communities across the State that we overwhelmingly support the rights of animals. We must ensure that our love and respect for animals is enshrined and protected in our legislation. I thank Minister Dugald Saunders and his team for their work in this space. As he mentioned in his contribution to debate on the bill, this incredibly complex piece of legislation has been amended over time. Work has been done to ensure that we get the best legislation. It has been lengthy and challenging. I recognise the work of the Minister and his team across party lines to ensure the best outcomes.

There are challenges to achieving the best animal welfare provisions for the different sectors of animals in this State. I know that members in this place, including the member for Oxley—who mentioned her dog, Jasper, in her valedictory speech—consider animals to be part of the family in many circumstances, yet still we see horrifying acts and mistreatment committed against those entities. Those living beings deserve rights, wellbeing and safety. A lot of work has been done across party lines to ensure a good outcome on this legislation. I thank all of those who were involved in drafting the legislation. I am very happy to support the bill.

Mr ALEX GREENWICH (Sydney) (10:08:45):

In reply: I thank the Minister for Agriculture, the member for Maitland, the member for North Shore and the member for Newtown for their contributions in support of the bill. Again I pay tribute to and thank the Hon. Emma Hurst and her staff for the successful passage of the legislation. It is the third Animal Justice Party bill that I have had the honour and privilege of sponsoring in the Legislative Assembly. It will be the third Animal Justice Party bill to pass the Parliament. New South Wales is a safer place for animals as a result of the work of the Animal Justice Party, particularly with the passage of this bill. I thank all members for their cooperation in getting the legislation through the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly. I thank the Animal Justice Party for the great work it has done in this Parliament. I commend the bill to the House.

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Mr Lee Evans):

The question is that this bill be now read a second time.

Motion agreed to.

Third Reading

Mr ALEX GREENWICH:

I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Motion agreed to.