Today the NSW Labor Government voted down our Greens bill to establish an Independent Office of Animal Welfare. At the same time, they've confirmed their own plans for an independent office — except that it will not be independent, not an office and not for animal welfare.
The NSW Upper House debated the Greens Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment (Independent Office of Animal Welfare) Bill 2023, with Labor teaming up with the Coalition to oppose the bill including:
The Coalition's spokesperson, Sarah Mitchell, said:
First and foremost, we think the establishment of the independent office of animal welfare would add an additional layer of bureaucracy that could lead to inefficiencies and tensions in the enforcement of animal welfare laws...We are concerned that it will instead just add red tape and undermine the important work that these agencies are already doing.... but we do not see the merit in this particular bill.
The bill also suggests animal cruelty laws in New South Wales are out of date.
Industries that rely on the use of animals—such as agriculture, research and entertainment—could face burdensome regulations that may not be practically feasible or that could threaten their economic viability. It is essential that any regulatory framework balances the welfare of animals with the legitimate needs of these sectors, ensuring that animal welfare improvements are sustainable and do not unfairly impact those who depend on these industries for their livelihoods.
The potential for increased bureaucracy, lack of accountability, overly prescriptive regulations and imbalanced representation are significant concerns that cannot be overlooked. We need an inclusive approach to animal welfare that addresses these concerns while achieving our shared objective of protecting animals, and we believe that the status quo achieves that outcome.
After patting themselves on the back once again for taking entirely miniscule actions for animals since getting into government last year, Labor's Minister for Agriculture said:
A further concern is that the model proposed by the bill includes the creation of an entirely new New South Wales government agency, a new statutory office with a CEO and a large new statutory committee. The costs and benefits of establishing and then operating all of that are completely unknown and entirely untested. An independent office of animal welfare proposed by the New South Wales Government will be appropriately developed to ensure that it is cost effective and complementary to the work of existing agencies, rather than duplicative.
The bill has not been subject to appropriate consultation. That is concerning, as the impacts of the bill would be widespread but are not fully understood. The appropriateness of the proposed model has not been tested with all relevant stakeholders. The bill proposes the creation of an entirely new New South Wales government agency, the type of which does not exist in any other State or Territory in Australia. Legislating a new government agency without consultation is extremely problematic in and of itself, let alone introducing a new agency that does not have a tried and tested example upon which to base such a model. It is crucial that proper consultation on the topic takes place, as there are a broad range of stakeholder and community views about the appropriate functions of an independent office.
Abigail spoke in response to these speakers:
In reply: I thank all those who contributed to debate on the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment (Independent Office of Animal Welfare) Bill 2023. It has been illuminating. I express particular thanks to the Hon. Emma Hurst for her very sensible and wise words, and special thanks to the Hon. Mark Banasiak for reading and engaging with the content of the bill. As I said in in my second reading speech, the bill was developed over a period of months with a whole lot of stakeholders, who have following these issues incredibly carefully not just in Australia federally and in various States and Territories, but also around the world, as well as proposing various drafts of bills. Again, I thank all of the stakeholders I mentioned in my second reading speech for their incredible assistance in pulling this draft together.
The House could pass this bill swiftly today and take one step forward in finally overhauling our State's decades‑old animal welfare regime. It is a straightforward bill, despite what members may have heard from a couple of speakers during the second reading debate. It exactly balances the views of experts across the board and takes into account what the community has been campaigning on for years. Unfortunately, we have a Labor Government that is too afraid to do anything that will remotely impact those who seek to profit from animal suffering. That has become extra clear today. I would like to correct some of the statements made by the Minister about this bill, but in the interests of time and given that I suspect the Minister knows full well that the comments, particularly those around limiting government power and discretion, were not correct, I will instead refer members to the second reading speech or the bill itself, which sets out how reasonable and democratic the bill is—as would be expected, after the detailed and lengthy consultation process that we undertook in drafting it.
The bill is put forward on behalf of the very stakeholders that the Labor Government made its commitment to when it said it would implement an independent office of animal welfare. Labor made a lot of promises during the election campaign, but 18 months on, the Government has not yet made good on them. Across various portfolio areas, some small progress is being made on some of those promises—and rightfully so, in areas where it takes a while to unpick what the previous Government had been doing, or where a novel approach is required to implement a particular promise. But in other areas, we have gone beyond foot‑dragging to the point that it is clear that the Labor Government simply has no intention of keeping the promise, and so it is with the Government's promise to implement an independent office of animal welfare. Minister Moriarty has made it crystal clear today that the Labor Government will not be keeping its promise to introduce an independent office of animal welfare, unless it is, one, not independent; two, not an office; and three, not about animal welfare.
Today the Minister put forward the Labor Party's position—confused as it is—that instead the Government is working hard in the background, despite no evidence of any stakeholders we know of having been properly consulted, on creating a body that keeps all power for animal welfare rules with the inherently conflicted Minister for Agriculture of the day, which does not have any operational costs, and which is required to consult as much with industry as it does with animal welfare stakeholders. In the same breath as saying there can be no ad hoc changes to animal welfare laws without overhauling the whole of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act [POCTAA], the Minister congratulates her Government on having made an ad hoc change to animal welfare laws outside of an overhaul of POCTAA. She waxed lyrical about the need to consult with stakeholders. I note that The Greens did in fact, as I said, consult with numerous stakeholders over a significant period of time for our bill, just not the industry ones that the Minister for Agriculture wants to consult with. Let me set the record straight on that.
While speaking of how Labor's independent office of animal welfare—which is not independent, not an office that will cost anything to run, and not about animal welfare but actually about industry—will require wide consultation to set up, the Minister championed a Government bill that was passed last week, on which Labor comprehensively failed to consult with animal welfare stakeholders. In the process, she has laid bare the sad reality of the Minns Labor Government in New South Wales: a Labor Government that will lie to the public that elected it. It is a Government that will do anything to avoid doing the hard work of implementing its election promises. It is a Government that has comprehensively failed to keep its commitments to animal welfare. The public will not be so fooled at the next election. I commend this bill to the House.
The bill went to a vote with The Greens, Animal Justice Party and the Legalise Cannabis Party voting in favour and the remaining parties voting against the bill, ultimately negativing it 28:6.
Read the full debate in Hansard here and here.