Animal Welfare Bill

The Hon. J.S. LEE (17:56): 

I rise today to speak about the Animal Welfare Bill 2024. This bill will replace the Animal Welfare Act 1995 and seeks to modernise South Australia's animal welfare laws to ensure that they are consistent with contemporary practices, science and community expectations.

The bill aims to provide a new framework to put animal welfare at the centre of decision-making and clearly recognises animals as living beings that experience positive and negative states. The definition of 'animal' has been expanded to include fish and cephalopods in certain contexts and the bill introduces a positive duty of care which requires owners to provide adequate food, water and living conditions. The bill seeks to increase accountability within the research and teaching sectors by improving regulation and oversight.

Notably, the government has adopted a range of new compliance and enforcement tools to provide greater flexibility to deal with cases of cruelty that may not have otherwise been able to be prosecuted. From the information provided to me in briefings, this seems to be a very sensible approach that will allow for greater nuance and provides a range of practical measures to help prevent cruelty and address contraventions of the act without always having to resort to prosecution.

Some of the other key changes in the bill include a provision for animals that have been seized to be considered forfeited after 30 days unless the owner uses the appeal processes provided under the bill. This proposition would prevent seized animals from being held for long periods of time while awaiting court outcomes and will result in better outcomes for the ongoing welfare of those animals. The bill also introduces an obligation for employees, contractors and volunteers in the greyhound racing industry to report any suspicion of animal welfare offences being committed in the sector. I understand that this was a recommendation from the independent inquiry into the governance of greyhound racing that has been adopted by the government.

The establishment of a new Animal Welfare Fund is another significant addition to this bill, which will capture licence fees, fines and penalties to be reinvested into supporting and promoting animal welfare outcomes. I understand that this section of the bill will require significant regulation and that the fund is intended to be used towards the promotion of research into animal welfare, including wildlife, and education programs relating to the protection of animal welfare and prevention of harm.

I would particularly like to make mention of the change to the definition of 'animal', which now includes fish. I know that questions were raised in the other place and also in this place about the impact this may have on recreational and commercial fishing practices. It is somewhat comforting for many to know that the minister has given strong assurances that fishing and aquaculture practices will not be impacted.

Likewise, the minister has assured members in the other place that this bill will not affect other industries, such as the dairy industry and other animal husbandry industries, as their codes of practice will remain attached to the new act as a regulation that gives an exemption to the general provision. However, it is important that these considerations are addressed explicitly by the minister because many industries and communities are heavily invested in and potentially impacted by animal welfare legislation, from livestock producers to breeders, hunters and fishers.

While the ministers have made assurances that practices such as duck hunting will not be regarded as an act of cruelty in this legislation, many organisations have raised concerns and prompted me to examine this further. Therefore, I wish to indicate that I will be considering supporting the amendments proposed by members to give ironclad certainty that this bill will not prohibit duck hunting or recreational game hunting activity.

I note that there was substantial debate and questioning in the other place around the issue of virtual fencing and understand that there has been very strong representation made by Livestock SA and other stakeholders for the bill to allow for virtual fencing to be used in South Australia. Therefore, I wish to indicate that I will be supporting the opposition's amendments in relation to the use of virtual fencing systems in line with industry submissions.

In regard to the number of amendments proposed by the Hon. Tammy Franks, I would like to take some time to consider those amendments during the debate and the committee stage. With those remarks, I commend the bill.