Dog and Cat Management (Breeder Reforms) Amendment Bill 2024

The Hon. J.S. LEE (12:39): 

I rise to speak in support of the Dog and Cat Management (Breeder Reforms) Amendment Bill 2024, a bill that represents a significant and commendable step forward in our state's approach to animal welfare and responsible pet ownership. This legislation responds to strong community expectations that we do more to prevent unethical breeding practices, eliminate so-called puppy factories and ensure that animals bred in this state are raised in humane, safe and regulated environments.

The introduction of mandatory breeder licensing, strengthened compliance measures and reinforced desexing requirements are all welcome reforms that reflect the values of a society that cares deeply about the welfare of its animals. I acknowledge the strong support this bill received in the other place. The government has tabled amendments that clarify key provisions and strengthen the bill's intent. These changes reflect the feedback of stakeholders and demonstrate a willingness to listen and refine the legislation to ensure it is both effective and enforceable.

I also wish to express my support for the amendments tabled by the Hon. Tammy Franks. These amendments, I believe, provide important additional safeguards by defining the number of breeding animals a person may keep under a licence, limiting the number of litters a breeding animal can produce and prohibiting the artificial insemination of dogs and cats for breeding purposes. These are thoughtful and principled amendments that reflect the concerns of animal welfare advocates and the broader community. They help ensure that breeding practices remain ethical, humane and focused on the wellbeing of the animals involved, not simply on maximising output or profit.

During the debate in the other place, many personal stories were shared. These stories are not just anecdotes, they are reflections of the bond between people and their pets, and they underscore the importance of ensuring that every animal has a chance to live a safe and cared-for life. I love dogs. I do not love cats as much as the Hon. Michelle Lensink, but all the animals that came into my family's life have provided a lot of joy, care, love and support that we all need a little bit more of sometimes.

While I support the bill and the amendments, I believe it is important to place on the record several broader concerns that remain relevant as we move towards implementation. There is a likelihood that increased compliance costs for breeders will be passed on to consumers, making pets less affordable and potentially driving some towards unregulated or unethical sources. This could, ironically, undermine the very welfare outcomes the bill seeks to achieve. The bill's reinforcement of mandatory desexing is a positive measure, but we must acknowledge that for some, particularly in rural and low income communities, this may present a financial or logistical burden.

Without accessible support or subsidies, we risk creating barriers to compliance for those who are otherwise responsible pet owners. These concerns are echoed by the Local Government Association of South Australia, which has made a detailed submission on this bill. The bill does not address the ongoing lack of a statewide framework for managing stray and unidentified cats, as was called for by the Local Government Association of South Australia.

Councils remain without adequate resources, and shelters such as the RSPCA and AWL are often only able to assist if the animal is injured. This leaves many healthy unidentifiable cats in a legal and welfare grey zone. Of particular concern is a provision allowing for the destruction of cats in prescribed areas without the need for identification, as detailed in the government's amendment No. 5 [AG-1]. While this may be intended to manage feral populations, the reality is that owned cats, particularly those not microchipped or whose details are not up to date, could be at risk of being destroyed. This is a deeply distressing prospect for pet owners and raises serious ethical questions about how we distinguish between feral, stray and domestic animals in practice.

Furthermore, local government authorities are being asked to take on expanded responsibilities under this bill, particularly in enforcement and community education, without any additional funding or structural support. This places councils in a difficult position. They are expected to deliver more with less while managing growing community expectations around animal welfare.

I also wish to acknowledge the concerns raised by the LGA. In its submission the LGA has rightly pointed out the need to maintain a clear distinction between animal management and animal welfare. Councils should not be expected to enforce welfare compliance without appropriate authority or funding. The LGA has also called for statewide cat management laws to ensure consistency and fairness, particularly for regional councils. Additionally, the submission highlights a loophole in microchipping and desexing regulations that undermines the integrity of the Dogs and Cats Online system, an issue that deserves urgent attention. These are practical, constructive recommendations that should inform the implementation phase of this legislation.

I support the intent and direction of this bill. I commend both the government and the Hon. Tammy Franks for their considered amendments. These reforms are necessary and welcome, and I also believe that it is our duty to ensure that their implementation is monitored closely and that the concerns raised by stakeholders and community today are not forgotten. I look forward to seeing these reforms implemented in a way that reflects the compassion and care our community expects.

With those remarks, I commend the bill.