- Roe 8 / Beeliar Wetlands
- Climate Change Coastal Impacts
- Coal Mining in Margaret River
- Cockburn Cement
- Homophobic bullying
- Jandakot Bushland Clearance
- Live Animal Exports
- No WA Shark Cull
- Point Peron Marina
- Protect Peaceful Protest
- Safe Passing Distances Bill - a Metre Matters
- Same Sex Marriage
- Stop GM Crops
- Current Issues
- Take Action
- Bills Introduced 2012
- Bills debated
- Budget Estimates Hearings
- Committee Reports
- Disallowance Motions
- Guide to Petitions
- How we can help
- Learn About Parliament
- Motions Debated
- Questions on Notice
- Questions without Notice 2009
- Questions without Notice 2010
- Questions without Notice 2011
Breed Specific Legislation - Questions
Hon LYNN MacLAREN to the minister representing the Minister for Local Government:
(1) Is the minister aware of the many jurisdictions worldwide that demonstrate that breed-specific legislation is ineffective?
(2) Is the minister aware of the “Calgary model”—an animal control by-law that originates from Calgary, Canada, that opposes breed-specific legislation?
(3) Are there other provisions of the Dog Amendment Bill 2013 based on the Calgary model?
(4) If yes to (3), which provisions?
(5) Are there any extra responsibilities for rangers under the Dog Amendment Bill 2013?
(6) If yes to (5), what training are rangers receiving to cope with extra responsibilities?
Hon HELEN MORTON replied:
I thank the member for some notice of the question.
(1) I am aware that various conclusions have been reported on the effectiveness of breed-specific legislation; however, this government wants to ensure that the community is protected from breeds that have been identified as capable of causing serious injury or even death if they attack.
(4) Proposed section 34 of the Dog Amendment Bill 2013.
(5) No; it provides clarification and more tools to assist with the enforcement of the legislation.
(6) Not applicable.