Seems Its Not Just Mandatory Desexing

[shortstep]

For those thinking of making an individual or group submission, this information might be of use. It relates to UQ studies on earlier desexing of cats (note they say the same does not apply to dogs):

'It is safest to desex kittens at 12 to 24 weeks of age. Statistics show that after 6 months of age, substantial proportion of female cats are already pregnant, making the surgery more complex, risky and ulitmately too late to prevent any unwanted litters. Put quite simply, early desexing of cats is better. If more cats were desexed between 12 to 24 weeks, rather than at the traditional 6 to 9 months, there would be fewer unwanted litters & fewer kittens euthanised.'

CCAH at UQ 2008

For goodness sakes, don't give the people the impression that they actually have a right to have an opinion on this matter? Listen to Aussienot she has the right idea.

We don't want them thinking that they can tell the Green/labor government to get out of their lives. They might start to believe that they are capable of deciding if and when to desex their pets with out the greens dictating that to them.

Be Green, Go Veg, Vote Green

End dog Slavery today!

Edited December 16, 2010 by shortstep

[Souff]

Please keep political parties out of your posts. Be angry, speak out, but keep party preference to yourself.

makes note to self ...... tell political parties to please keep dogs out of their posts ......

.................... and speak out against censorship of any kind

Original post.....

'The draft bill was introduced to the Assembly yesterday by the Greens

Get it, this is a Greens sponsored bill. Mabye the Greens should leave dogs out of politics if I am not allowed to comment on their bill.

Make note to Aussienot...I will respond to post about this legilsation the Greens are introduceing.

Unless you are trying to tell me I am not Green enough when it comes to supporting ending dog slavery and dog ownership.

Be Green, Go Veg, Vote Green!

End dog slavery in ACT today!!

:D By jove Shortstep you are right! This bill WAS introduced by THE GREENS.

http://www.legislation.act.gov.au/es/db_40...df/db_40363.pdf

Animal Welfare Legislation Amendment

Bill 2010 (Exposure Draft)

Introduced by Caroline Le Couteur MLA, ACT

Greens

Consultation period: 8 December 2010 – 22

February

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Contents

*

So why has anyone got a problem with Shortstep giving THE GREENS all the publicity they deserve?

Can't have THE GREENS hiding their light under a bushel now can we?

This Bill is a GREENS bill ..... brought to you from THE GREENS ...... fact.

Souff

[Souff]

For goodness sakes, don't give the people the impression that they actually have a right to have an opinion on this matter? Listen to Aussienot she has the right idea.

We don't want them thinking that they can tell the Green/labor government to get out of their lives. They might start to believe that they are capable of deciding if and when to desex their pets with out the greens dictating that to them.

Be Green, Go Veg, Vote Green

End dog Slavery today!

Next thing you know people will start to think they have the right to think .....

[shortstep]

This Bill is a GREENS bill ..... brought to you from THE GREENS ...... fact.

Souff

Scoff sometimes I just feel like I am bashing my head agaist a bunch of watermelons,

sort of like this

http://www.maniacworld.com/Man-Smashes-40-...-with-Head.html

[mita]

Mita your goal of getting all of Oz under the laws you got in place in your shire is a wonderful goal. Very strict mandatory spay neuter with all breeders under direct permit and inspection by councils, planning depoartments and the RSPCA is a good start to ending dog slavery! Now add ownership licensing and we got em all under our thumbs!

Not many nasty slave dog breeders and nasty slave dog owners will keep breeding and owning dogs under these ever increasingly intrusive laws and when they find out the can go to jail or be fined..well that will toast them!

You are so cleaver, we need more like you to fight for the cause!

You have my full support and backing on this worth goal!!

Be Green, Go Veg, Vote Green.

End Dog Slavery and Dog Ownership today!

What did I suggest to others....especially supporting Diva's comment that individual submissions will count?

Tease out the details yourselves, in the ACT, & make a submission as an individual or a group if you wish Content? Your own thoughts & opinions. I deliberately didn't give a link to the Gold Coast area system. Another situation is a chance to think afresh.

The draft bill is part of a democratic process.

You've set out your list of your feared goals & ascribed them to my thinking. Your terrors belong to you. I'm too busy being 'cleaver'.

[Souff]

This Bill is a GREENS bill ..... brought to you from THE GREENS ...... fact.

Souff

Scoff sometimes I just feel like I am bashing my head agaist a bunch of watermelons,

sort of like this

http://www.maniacworld.com/Man-Smashes-40-...-with-Head.html

Still red on the inside alright.....

Souff

[Diva]

Breeders in the surrounding areas of the broader Canberra region should probably have a good look at this and think about making a submission too. I am not sure from this that they will be able to legally advertise puppies in the ACT? Which might be an issue for some.

[Aidan3]

So why has anyone got a problem with Shortstep giving THE GREENS all the publicity they deserve?

No-one has got a problem with shortstep making honest criticism, kept in perspective. The extra rubbish that has been added and the attack on Mita were out of line.

[shortstep]

You've set out your list of your feared goals & ascribed them to my thinking. Your terrors belong to you. I'm too busy being 'cleaver'.

Yes you are right Mita, I am not as confident as you are. I do worry that it might not be right to push my personal beliefs on to all of society. I know that pets are man made slaves. I know the world will be a greener place without them. I know it will end their suffering at the hands of man. But I also wonder deep down if they do not, just a little bit, enjoy their lives with me as much as I enjoy spending my life with them.

But not to worry, I will put those fears away. I will try harder to be a good global citizen and I will fully support all laws that bring grief to pet owners and pet breeders.

Mandatory desexing of all pets in every state. All slave dog breeders need to licensed and inspected by the RSPCA, the council and the planning department. Strong and powerful laws to convict slave dog breeders with and as many costs put on to slave dog breeders as possible. I am in and you have my support! We must get these slave dog owners and breeders in line.

Be Green, Go Veg, Vote Green.

End dog slavery today!

[Miranda]

So why has anyone got a problem with Shortstep giving THE GREENS all the publicity they deserve?

The extra rubbish that has been added and the attack on Mita were out of line.

So is the implication that all vegetarians vote green

[Souff]

So why has anyone got a problem with Shortstep giving THE GREENS all the publicity they deserve?

No-one has got a problem with shortstep making honest criticism, kept in perspective. The extra rubbish that has been added and the attack on Mita were out of line.

Aidan, I asked what was wrong with giving the publicity ... I never suggested that Shortstep was making "honest criticism".

This is a fairly robust forum and you know what they say about the heat in the kitchen ..... Good Golly, all of this fuzzy hypersensitivity in the air could make one suspect that there might be an election coming up soon!

[lappiemum]

There is a process for dealing with this.

First you need to make a written submission. Be clear, concise and logical in your arguments. Point out that many aspects of the Bill are already covered for registered breeders in terms of the kennel council rules. Also point out the impracticalities of the more extreme clauses in the bill.

You may or may not appear as a witness should the Bill be referred to Committee. However, in the meantime I would be making appointments with your local MP and anyone else you can book in with in the territory parliament to lobby against it. Go to both the ALP and the Coalition and Independents. Do your research, take in a one page summary of the problems with the Bill, and leave it there with the MP. The other parties will not be inclined to support this, so give them reasons not to.

Oh, its good to organise a delegation of breeders and responsible owners who oppose the bill if you do visit your MPs. They love talking to realy people, not just the lobbyists.

If you need any info of lobbying just PM me.

Edited December 16, 2010 by lappiemum

[shortstep]

There is a process for dealing with this.

First you need to make a written submission. Be clear, concise and logical in your arguments. Point out that many aspects of the Bill are already covered for registered breeders in terms of the kennel council rules. Also point out the impracticalities of the more extreme clauses in the bill.

You may or may not appear as a witness should the Bill be referred to Committee. However, in the meantime I would be making appointments with your local MP and anyone else you can book in with in the territory parliament to lobby against it. Go to both the ALP and the Coalition and Independents. Do your research, take in a one page summary of the problems with the Bill, and leave it there with the MP. The other parties will not be inclined to support this, so give them reasons not to.

Oh, its good to organise a delegation of breeders and responsible owners who oppose the bill if you do visit your MPs. They love talking to realy people, not just the lobbyists.

If you need any info of lobbying just PM me.

Yes you are right! Should not take too long and if you get it wrong, oh well at least you tried.

Be sure to send the Greens a thank you note for allowing you the pleasure of doing this lovely task over the holidays!

What a nice present!

Be Green, Go Veg, Vote Green!

We don't eat them, we don't wear them and we don't own them!

Want a dog, get a stuffed toy!

Edited December 16, 2010 by shortstep

[Souff]

I really don't give a rats what people EAT or how they vote.

But I do care what politicians do with laws in relation to our dogs ..... AND HOW THEY DO IT.

What I see here is a classic piece of political slickness, timed to get the least possible response from the public.

Here we are at Christmastime ..... ho ho ho and all that. Politicians and their tacticians KNOW that this is a brilliant time of the year to call for discussion on a proposed bill because they dont really want to read too many replies and golly me, would you believe it, most of the politicians that you dog owners might want to talk to in their offices will probably be away on their January holiday! Goodness gracious me, who ever would have thought of that? That will mean a lesser number of submissions to read through. Who ever would have thought of that? Bureaucrats and politicians, that is who.

So when you go off for your Xmas - Jan holiday to the coast, and you get back the grass has grown long again and there is all that back to school shopping to do, and then there is all the fun of the Australia Day weekend ....... oh, were you going to write a submission ? Oh never mind, you will do it later...... but then organising the kids into their new school year, not to mention settling yourself back in at the office routine ...... OMG will you look at the date? Oh dear, no time left to do that submission now, and anywho, everyone else would have done theirs ...... wouldnt they?

This is exactly what the Australian political machines rely on, the "busyness" and apathy of those who vote for them. If you have got a bill that might create some disturbing waves, sneak it in at Christmas time.

If you have got a concept that is also a bit radical in the animal breeding world and the farmers wont buy it, but you want to set a precedent in Australia, bring it in in the ACT where all the greens will vote for it because, if I am not mistaken, they have the majority. Voila! You have your precedent for other states then to follow.

Which Parliament was the first in Australia to enact the tail docking legislation?

Yep. you better believe it, that little ole ACT parliament.

With a majority of Greens and Labor who usually vote as one.

No, not the Federal Parliament on the hill that governs all of Australia's 21 million people - a much smaller parliament down the road that governs the Territory ..... that governs a staggering population of 300,000 people. A "you beaut" place to set a precedent .... easy as!!!

Here are those who govern the Australian Capital Territory's population of 300,000 - the politicians who will again be setting a precedent for all of Australia if they get this Bill through unamended:

Barr, Mr Andrew Molonglo Australian Labor Party (02) 6205 0011

Fax: (02) 6205 0157

Bresnan, Ms Amanda Brindabella The ACT Greens (02) 6205 0130

Fax: (02) 6205 0777

Burch, Ms Joy Brindabella Australian Labor Party (02) 6205 0020

Fax: (02) 6205 3165

Coe, Mr Alistair Ginninderra Canberra Liberals (02) 6205 0101

Fax: (02) 6205 3002

Corbell, Mr Simon Molonglo Australian Labor Party (02) 6205 0000

Fax: (02) 6205 0535

Doszpot, Mr Steve Brindabella Canberra Liberals (02) 6205 0131

Fax: (02) 6205 0412

Dunne, Mrs Vicki Ginninderra Canberra Liberals (02) 6205 0283

Fax: (02) 6205 3106

Gallagher, Ms Katy Molonglo Australian Labor Party (02) 6205 0840

Fax: (02) 6205 3030

Hanson, Mr Jeremy Molonglo Canberra Liberals (02) 6205 0133

Fax: (02) 6205 3017

Hargreaves, Mr John Brindabella Australian Labor Party (02) 6205 0111

Fax: 02 6205 0427

Hunter, Ms Meredith Ginninderra The ACT Greens (02) 6205 0106

Fax: (02) 6205 0418

Le Couteur, Ms Caroline Molonglo The ACT Greens (02) 6205 0051

Fax: (02) 6205 3000

Porter AM, Ms Mary Ginninderra Australian Labor Party (02) 6205 0100

Fax: (02) 6205 0040

Rattenbury, Mr Shane Molonglo The ACT Greens (02) 6205 0005

Fax: (02) 6205 0007

Seselja, Mr Zed Molonglo Canberra Liberals (02) 6205 0323

Fax: (02) 6205 3001

Smyth, Mr Brendan Brindabella Canberra Liberals (02) 6205 0099

Fax: (02) 6205 0859

Stanhope, Mr Jon Ginninderra Australian Labor Party (02) 6205 0104

Fax: (02) 6205 0433

Good luck Canberrans.

Australia will be watching to see if this next precedent, which is in reality the next notch by PETA, is set by your very own ACT Government.

Souff

[Souff]

double post, now removed

Edited December 16, 2010 by Souff

[Steve]

Be Green, Go Veg, Vote Green!

End dog slavery in ACT today!!

It's O/T, but as you've already been told, in another thread... yours is an extreme 'definition' of Green.

And you've added a pseudo-motto. 'End dog slavery...'

The Greens have entered a draft bill in the ACT. As with any draft proposal, it's open for negotiation & lobbying. And redrafting. A good thing.

On face value, the basic structure doesn't appear very different from the jointly designed system in the Gold Coast area.

Except there's a clearer statement about desexing. As others have said, details need to be teased out. So proactive submissions will count.

Mita your goal of getting all of Oz under the laws you got in place in your shire is a wonderful goal. Very strict mandatory spay neuter with all breeders under direct permit and inspection by councils, planning depoartments and the RSPCA is a good start to ending dog slavery! Now add ownership licensing and we got em all under our thumbs!

Not many nasty slave dog breeders and nasty slave dog owners will keep breeding and owning dogs under these ever increasingly intrusive laws and when they find out the can go to jail or be fined..well that will toast them!

You are so cleaver, we need more like you to fight for the cause!

You have my full support and backing on this worth goal!!

Be Green, Go Veg, Vote Green.

End Dog Slavery and Dog Ownership today!

Not very many breeders and dog owners are happy on the gold caost and they have devised all kinds of ways to dodge the laws.

Some notes of interest For Gold Coast model.

Under “Guidelines – Identification of Anti-Competitive Provisions in Local Laws, Section 3.2.6, paragraph 5, it states, “The identification of possible anti-competitive provision and any ensuing public interest test must therefore be completed prior to the subordinate local law being made.” I don’t believe this Public Interest Test was carried out on the Gold Coast.

Of the various interested parties quoted in the Preface of the Code of Practice, I know for a fact, at least one of them (GC Dog Obedience) were not party to the discussions and did not agree with the permit system and told AWL this.

Under “Guidelines – Identification of Anti-Competitive Provisions in Local Laws, Section 5.2.2, an activity of a commercial nature cannot be discriminated against. A commercial activity is one that “would normally involve a financial transaction and includes a notion of profit making or economic gain”. This does not necessarily make it a business and requiring a business license. It is quite legal to operate a small home enterprise (say selling Tupperware – no doubt considerably more profitable than dog breeding) without any planning permission as the primary purpose of the property is still a residence so you can operate a commercial enterprise that cannot be touched under planning laws.

4 (2) and (4) - Permit required to keep more than one dog under 600 m2 or more than 2 dogs if land is over 600 m2

- Common Law right of an owner of land to the use and enjoyment of the land. Section 77 states that "A local law should not, without sufficient justification, unduly restrict ordinary activities". A person who keeps exhibits and occasionally breeds their domestic pets for a hobby is surely an "ordinary activity".

4(3) No permit required to keep any number of greyhounds if they are registered the Greyhound Racing Authority.

(iii) Limiting participation to those persons or bodies who hold membership of a particular occupational or professional organisation.

19 Must obtain breeder permit in order to keep 1 or more entire dogs or cats and who wishes to either breed or sell offspring.

A law should be consistent with the principles of natural Justice, i.e., something should not be done to a person that will deprive the person of some right or interest or legitimate expectation of a benefit.

(iii) Limits number of participants to those who meet the enclosure and housing standards and can pay the $369.00. Also (x) Creates rights or permit specified activities denied to non holders.

Hobby breeders can no longer enjoy the breeding of their dogs' offspring or the enjoyment of furthering their hobby or small home business by selling such offspring, unless they can meet the permit requirements. Therefore anti competitive: Barriers to entry to a market and barriers to competition within a market. Confers advantages on certain parties to the detriment of any actual or potential competitors.

18(3) does not derogate from, laws regulating the use or development of land.

Can't affect statutory lawful right of use?

48 (d) (I) Permit for an additional dog only granted if all 3 dogs are desexed within 3 months.

Fundamental Legislative Principles - ie traditionally accepted liberties would include the ability to breed and profit from domestic pets.

52 Various conditions, enclosures (4(a)-(c ), 13)+B1, sizes etc required in order to obtain a Breeder Permit.

49-52. Express provision should be made for the penalty if there is an offence. There are almost no mention of penalties for offences.

(v) requirements for prescribed quality or technical standards to be observed or for specified equipment to be used in regard to a particular business activity. Also (vii) restrictions on business relating to matters such as size of premises, provision of specified facilities. Also (ix)prescribing technical specifications or standards that can only be met by a particular operator.

Requirements of enclosures far in excess of hobby dog breeder and in excess of Code of Conduct of associations such as ANKC. Means that almost no hobby breeder of purebred dogs would be able to obtain a breeder permit or keep more than 2 dogs - unlike other parts of Australia where no such laws are in place.

Home Office sector is not affected by normal planning laws and a small enterprise can be carried out from a private residence if that the primary purpose of the property is a private residence. Therefore, these laws break Fair Trade Practices Act even though dog and cat breeding may only be a small hobby, it is none the less potentially income producing.

52(24) Must advise GCCC of the Vet you use.

Breeches freedom of choice, right to change vets.

52 (39)(b) Can only sell an undesexed kitten to the holder of a Breeder Permit.

(viii) the nomination of a particular person or body as the sole or preferred customer or supplier in regard to a particular business activity.

Limits "customers" Gold Coast cat breeders who have applied for a permit. Current information on this is that there may be less than 6 such people on the entire Gold Coast. Can't sell to anywhere else in Australia as no one else has a Breeder Permit system?

52 (42) and (43) keeping of detailed records of all activities and making this available for inspection and allowing GCCC to take photocopies or all records.

Section 68 - - requires Warrant. Section 69 - provide protection against self incrimination.

Invasion of Privacy. Also an individual cannot be forced to provide anything to an official that incriminates the person.

52 (47) The holder of permit must comply with the Code of Practice

Code of Practice is highly restrictive including desexing of females at 6 years of age, very limited period in which to breed, separate enclosures for each female with a litter (not standard practice with all breeders as in some breeds other members of the pack are involved in raising the pups), number of times to feed your cats and dogs each day, when to wean, arbitrary quarantine periods, etc. Possible encroachment of Civil Liberties since my right to make responsible decisions has been taken away.

52B (19) All animals owned by holder of permit who is a kennel must be desexed.

23, 44-55 Law should have logical and coherent structure and have content and language that promote effective communication. This particular section is impossible to understand when and how it applies.

Hard to breed anything if they are all desexed.

52 Term of Permit.

Extremely vague.

59(2) Section does not apply to a guide dog used by blind person or a deaf person.

Discriminates against Service and Assistance Dogs. See anti-discrimination Act for Disabilities.

Section 18 (1)-(5) of Local Law No. 12 (Keeping and Control of animals) - any animal not covered by permit and can be seized and destroyed.

Section 68 - Needs a warrant issued by a Judge or other Judicial officer.

Fundamental Legislative Principles - ie traditionally accepted liberties would include the ability to breed and profit from domestic pets.

[wuffles]

Which Parliament was the first in Australia to enact the tail docking legislation?

Yep. you better believe it, that little ole ACT parliament.

With a majority of Greens and Labor who usually vote as one.

No, not the Federal Parliament on the hill that governs all of Australia's 21 million people - a much smaller parliament down the road that governs the Territory ..... that governs a staggering population of 300,000 people. A "you beaut" place to set a precedent .... easy as!!!

And the ACT is also one of the only places in Australia that doesn't have BSL. Personally I like living in a place that actually tries to do something about issues that affect us... they might not get it right 100% of the time but it's nice that they try.

But I'm not a registered breeder, and I don't understand the proposed legislation well enough to be up in arms about it. I see some things in there that I like the sound of. But what would I know, I'm just an "average" ACT resident

[Souff]

.... I'm not a registered breeder, and I don't understand the proposed legislation well enough to be up in arms about it. I see some things in there that I like the sound of. But what would I know, I'm just an "average" ACT resident

And for all you know, I could live there too. I am not against the ACT's residents.

But I am dead against the trickery of political processes in this country. We have seen it before and we will see it again.

If you have a beef about the legislation, then lodge a protest to the ACT politicians.

If you don't understand what this is really all about, or if you are not bothered by it, then have a lovely ACT Christmas.

Souff

[wuffles]

.... I'm not a registered breeder, and I don't understand the proposed legislation well enough to be up in arms about it. I see some things in there that I like the sound of. But what would I know, I'm just an "average" ACT resident

And for all you know, I could live there too. I am not against the ACT's residents.

But I am dead against the trickery of political processes in this country. We have seen it before and we will see it again.

If you have a beef about the legislation, then lodge a protest to the ACT politicians.

If you don't understand what this is really all about, or if you are not bothered by it, then have a lovely ACT Christmas.

Souff

I wasn't implying that you had a beef with ACT's residents, I was just trying to say that I have a different opinion to most on here probably because I'm not a breeder.

I understand what this is about, but to get a good understanding of the actual legislation it needs to be read alongside the current legislation... which people should do if they are going to lodge a submission.

[Souff]

I wasn't implying that you had a beef with ACT's residents, I was just trying to say that I have a different opinion to most on here probably because I'm not a breeder.

I understand what this is about, but to get a good understanding of the actual legislation it needs to be read alongside the current legislation... which people should do if they are going to lodge a submission.

Very good advice. ACT residents need to make the comparisons between the existing legislation and the proposed bill.

The cost of making new legislation is huge, and ACT voters should be asking the question "Why are you spending our resources on writing more new legislation - what is wrong with the current legislation?"

If the money that was being spent on this proposed Bill was applied to a better bus service from Canberra Airport then I would say it was money well spent.

Souff

Edited December 16, 2010 by Souff