Julie R Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 The sad thing is its not just a Victorian issue - these things have a way of creeping their way around the country. We as a dog loving population have no voice, no real support and no-one in our canine controls who really has a pair and the the gumption or the care factor to stand up and use them. Hi Take a minute to watch this. If it doesn't make you smile, nothing will! http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=pkPNa4DBFHI Please note the different breeds all being compatible,getting on well and enjoying themselves...... Yes these dogs are well trained and obviously well taken care of, but just goes to show what responsible and educated ownership is capable of achieving. Pam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmwvic Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 That government "survey" had around 1700 responses. Minister Joe Helper's Office staff (aka advisors) invented this so called "survey" and the Minister's Office compiled the responses. They have kept the results very quiet for obvious reasons. According to the Bureau of Animal Welfare (BAW) even they have not been privy to the results. The only way to access the responses will be through Freedom of Information With respect to the current legislation BAW went through a "consultation" process with their selected privileged "stakeholders". BAW's definition of stakeholders is: 'Stakeholders' are major representative organisations whose member's interests might be impacted eg Dogs Victoria, RSPCA, Animals Australia, PIAA, DAMIC, MAV, VFF, AWAC, AVA, community Groups, Councils, Lost Dogs home, Animal Aid, Australian ABPT Club etc as distinct to individuals. We would expect these to consult with their subordinate organisations and members in order to develop opinion of a broad number of individuals' Also, "With legislation we approach a sample of affected stakeholder organisations to get some initial reaction to government proposals. The exposure in Parliament of a draft bill is considered as the community consultation phase and we notify as many organisations as possible(who are expected to notify their subordinate organisations)" In the most recent consultation about this legislation with a sample of affected stakeholders the stakeholders were not provided with anything in writing with which they could consult with their members or any sub-member organisation. They were simply asked to respond to a set of questions put to them verbally. Minutes provided only had the stakeholders immediate responses from these meetings. There were no minuted questions! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zayda_asher Posted May 23, 2010 Share Posted May 23, 2010 Link is fixed. Same link as before. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Response to Bill I'll have a read tomorrow, when I'm not so tired! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted May 23, 2010 Author Share Posted May 23, 2010 (edited) That government "survey" had around 1700 responses. Imwvic .... I'm trying to back track to where you first brought up about "that" government survey but (probably because I'm in a hurry) can't find it. If you have referenced to it because someone else brought it up, I can't back track (without wading through posts) because you've not quoted who or what you are responding to. I'm trying to recall what the survey was about. Contrary to the perception of its name, getting information via "Freedom of Information" is not "free" and depending on how much there is in the documents, it can cost a fair amount to obtain it. When I was working on the PPCollar campaign in the early days, I think it cost me a good couple of hundred dollars to obtain a copy of the info from "Freedom of Information" department that I initially needed. If the contents of the survey would help to lend weight to what we are trying to achieve here, then acquiring the info from Freedom of Information may well be worthwhile. It takes a while to get so if it could be useful, it might be wise to spend this time organising that, rather than the possibility of getting in sufficient time for any benefit being thwarted due to Government pushing Bill/s through faster than we are able to keep up with. Edited May 23, 2010 by Erny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APBT Club of Aust Inc. Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 (edited) Does anyone know what The "Doimino directory" is? I have just looked in my Junk email folder and found 9 messages similar to the following Your message Subject: Kindly consider the following re Domestic Animals Amendment (Dangerous Dogs) Bill 2010. was not delivered to: [email protected] because: User brendan.jenkins ([email protected]) not listed in Domino Directory as well as this Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject: Kindly consider the following re Domestic Animals Amendment (Dangerous Dogs) Bill 2010. The following recipient(s) could not be reached: 'edward.o’[email protected]' The requested operation failed. I know I had problems with the first email as I had sent to all the MLA's at once and the system didn't like it. had to resend to groups of 20 or so at a time. Edited May 24, 2010 by APBT Club of Aust Inc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted May 24, 2010 Author Share Posted May 24, 2010 Don't know, I'm sorry. But without looking it up, I know that I did send to at least one (I think both) of those people and did not receive any error messages. Maybe it was just a glitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmwvic Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 That government "survey" had around 1700 responses. Imwvic .... I'm trying to back track to where you first brought up about "that" government survey but (probably because I'm in a hurry) can't find it. If you have referenced to it because someone else brought it up, I can't back track (without wading through posts) because you've not quoted who or what you are responding to. I'm trying to recall what the survey was about. Sorry, Erny I didn't bring up "that" government survey. See below I've just read this and it's taking me a while to get my head around it. I'm sure I responded to a government survey a few months ago in which I pointed out that certain proposals were not acceptable - with what I thought were decent reasons. It seems like the proposals have just been turned into a Bill.Anyhow, I'm working on a letter. This was the infamous online survey on "Dangerous Dogs" on the Department of Primary Industries home page. If you wish I can post the questions asked. Contrary to the perception of its name, getting information via "Freedom of Information" is not "free" and depending on how much there is in the documents, it can cost a fair amount to obtain it. When I was working on the PPCollar campaign in the early days, I think it cost me a good couple of hundred dollars to obtain a copy of the info from "Freedom of Information" department that I initially needed. I am in the process of applying for these results under FOI. I fully understand FOI's are not free having done a few over the years. This one will cost at least $500 but will be worth every cent. Unfortunately the process is lengthy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie R Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 ( I'm trying to recall what the survey was about. ) Hi below is a copy of the DPI survey Pam -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Victorian Government is preparing to introduce legislation to toughen laws around dangerous dogs and your view is important. Please let us know what you think about dangerous dogs by answering the questions and providing your comments on this online survey. If a stray dog is suspected by a council officer to be a danger to the public by virtue of its size, breed or disposition and it is also not registered – should councils have the power to immediately seize and destroy the dog? If a dog has already been declared a “dangerous dog” by a council and it is found at large should councils be able to seize it and immediately destroy it? Should there be a penalty for possession of an unregistered dog, and what should that penalty be? Should medical practitioners or hospitals be required to report any dog bites to the Government Chief Medical Officer or the Police or Councils? Should restricted breed (i.e. pit bull) owners be able to keep their animal only if its de-sexed and muzzled when off the property and registered or should they all be destroyed? Do you have any further comments you would like to make? The Department of Primary Industries (DPI) is committed to protecting personal information provided by you in accordance with the principles of the Information Privacy Act 2000. Your personal information will not be disclosed to any other organisation, unless authorised by law. If you wish to access information held about you or have any other enquires about this project please contact [email protected] on (03) 5774 2208. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APBT Club of Aust Inc. Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 This survey was posted on the Victorian Government DPI website back in January 2010. The thing that made my blood boil was that it was supposed to be a survey on "dangerous dogs", but they couldn't help themselves, they just had to add a couple of double loaded questions on Restricted Breeds as well. Seems this government doesn't even know the difference, yet it's the same political party that bought in BSL in this and every other state in Aust. I tried to contact the person whose name appeared at the bottom of the survey at the time, They worked for the Fisheries Dept or I should say used to. When I inquired as to why someone from Fisheries would be a contact for a DD survey, I was informed that this person may have shown an interest. I was flabbergasted to say the least. Seems they had gone to work for Murry Golburn water, so I tried them and their HR dept had never heard of them. Suppose I'd be hiding to if my name was put on the worldwide web attached to garbage like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tybrax Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 (edited) Sorry wrong Bill. tybrax Edited May 24, 2010 by tybrax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APBT Club of Aust Inc. Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 (edited) http://www.legislation.act.gov.au/a/2010-3/default.aspThe Law has been Repealed. tybrax WHOOPS WHAT YOU'VE POSTED is the ACT NOT VIC A LAW HAS TO BE PASSED TO BE REPEALED Edited May 24, 2010 by APBT Club of Aust Inc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tybrax Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Hahahahaha my god oops Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted May 24, 2010 Author Share Posted May 24, 2010 (edited) That government "survey" had around 1700 responses. Minister Joe Helper's Office staff (aka advisors) invented this so called "survey" and the Minister's Office compiled the responses. They have kept the results very quiet for obvious reasons. According to the Bureau of Animal Welfare (BAW) even they have not been privy to the results. Ah yes .... I remember that Survey and I did participate in it. I would have thought that if the BAW were remotely interested, they would be able to source the info via FOI in the same way we can. Most likely, if they wanted it, they wouldn't have to pay like we do. It would DEFINITELY be interesting to know the results of the survey. But $500 is a lot of money and I'd hate for you to have spent that for information that's not helpful. But I know from past experience also that sometimes that's a punt we need to take. Edited May 24, 2010 by Erny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted May 24, 2010 Author Share Posted May 24, 2010 (edited) One of the pollies have responded to one of my letters informing me that it is his understanding that the Bill, at this stage, is now not being debated in this Parliamentary week. The next sitting of Parliament is in the week commencing 7 June 2010. I'm trying to quantify/confirm the above and I will confirm here as soon as I am able, but it seems we have even more time to generate those letters and NOW is the time to do it. Keep it up right up until the last. Edited May 24, 2010 by Erny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted May 24, 2010 Author Share Posted May 24, 2010 Continue to 'stand-by' regarding the Bill debate date. Seems we have been given two different responses from two different people within parliament. In the meantime, please treat this as one where there IS still time to get your letters in, but simultaneously treat it as urgent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted May 24, 2010 Author Share Posted May 24, 2010 (edited) Ok - the information that I received suggesting the Bill debate will not take place until the week beginning 7th June could be accurate, but it may be a bit premature. So in the meantime until this is officially confirmed, please presume that the debate can occur this week on any day from tomorrow onwards. BUT please do not think it is too late. Electronic mail is something we can make (and have made) good use of. Edited May 24, 2010 by Erny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echo Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Ok - the information that I received suggesting the Bill debate will not take place until the week beginning 7th June could be accurate, but it may be a bit premature. So in the meantime until this is officially confirmed, please presume that the debate can occur this week on any day from tomorrow onwards. BUT please do not think it is too late. Electronic mail is something we can make (and have made) good use of. :D Erny, below is a copy of email response I and others who have emailed have received. Thank you for your email and for forwarding your feedback and concerns. I will take your views into account when the bill is debated and I will advise you of the outcome of the debate when it occurs. It is my understanding that the Bill, at this stage, is now not being debated in this Parliamentary week. The next sitting of Parliament is in the week commencing 7 June 2010. Regards Bill Sykes MP, State Member for Benalla Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Agriculture & Water 2/55 Carrier Street, Benalla 3672 Ph: 03 5762 2100 Fx: 03 5762 4478 Mobile: 0427 624 989 Email: [email protected] It matches the information you have received. This being the case, then there is still time to drum up a lot more protests. To anyone who has not yet responded to this call for support: Don't be complacent and leave it to others. Once the proposals become law, it is too late to complain. The time to act is NOW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted May 24, 2010 Author Share Posted May 24, 2010 Thanks Echo - and yes, everyone, please write in if you haven't done so already. Numbers .......... we need numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arrow Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Letters sent. Does anyone know why Dogs Victoria have taken a "She'll-be-right" attitude to this? (message from the President on the Dogs Vic website) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebailey Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Letters sent.Does anyone know why Dogs Victoria have taken a "She'll-be-right" attitude to this? (message from the President on the Dogs Vic website) I was hoping there would be some discussion about this. I posted their response here earlier today. Do any Dogs Victoria members read these lists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now