Motions

City of Whyalla By-Laws

The Hon. C. BONAROS (16:16): I move:

That by-law No. 7 of the City of Whyalla concerning cats, made under the Local Government Act 1999 on 16 August 2021 and laid on the table of this council on 7 September 2021, be disallowed.

For the benefit of members, there are three related matters that I intend to speak to once, and I will do that now. There is also an item listed at No. 50 on the Notice Paper which relates to the City of Campbelltown cat by-laws. I do not intend to speak on each of these individually so I will wrap it up in the one go, much to the delight of the Hon. Terry Stephens. At the outset, I will admit also that I am not much of a cat person. In fact, I am allergic to them. Yes, they give me terrible hives and make me extraordinarily uncomfortable and I do not actually really like them. I am very much a dog person.

An honourable member: Fair call.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: Yes, it is a fair call. But you would not know that from the number of motions I put up about cats in this place. I do so because it has nothing to do with whether you like cats or you do not like cats, or you think cats should be contained or you think cats should be treated like dogs. It is because the current process that we have in relation to dealing with cats and their confinement is not working.

The growing number of by-laws that the Legislative Review Committee receives and that we have to consider in terms of a disallowance is evidence of that. I am not passing any judgement on any of the measures contained in any of these by-laws. That is not the point of these disallowances. The point of the motion is to highlight the very real need for a statewide approach to this issue rather than the ad hoc and what has become a very inconsistent approach that we currently have.

The point of the motion is to highlight that if we do nothing, as we have done for a number of years, then we will continue to be forced to spend our time before the Legislative Review Committee hearing from councils about the merits of their by-laws compared to other councils and their by-laws. It is simply not efficient, and I have learned that it is also very divisive because councils are adopting different models. There is no consistency between those models. Everyone thinks they have the best model, and inevitably there is something in their model that is the subject of contention.

The RSPCA's main concern at present is the state's individual council by-law approach to cat management, which it deems as inefficient and ineffective. They say:

i. Over 36 council by-laws are in existence, but most are quite different and result in a highly inconsistent cat management strategy in SA.

ii For any by-law to be effective, the Dog and Cat Management Act must be revised to allow for the seizure and detention of identified cats wandering at large. Until this happens any by-laws are stop gap measures at best that work around this deficiency and will not lead to effective control of the state's cat overpopulation.

iii Effective cat management is a complex issue and most councils in developing their by-laws do not have the resources nor expertise to fully research and develop appropriate legislation. This is clearly evidenced with the serious animal welfare concerns in the Campbelltown Council by-law and their replication by Gawler council.

iv. Ratepayers are surely unnecessarily funding legal costs across multiple councils in developing these sub-standard bylaws.

v. The Dog and Cat Management Act will be reviewed properly in 2022 with cat management as a priority. It is now time to end the ongoing proliferation of inconsistent cat by-laws and wait for a professionally developed state wide legislative framework to be implemented.

I really do not think that we need to say much more than that. I think the RSPCA has covered it quite well.

One of the by-laws that I deal with is the Campbelltown council by-law and it too acknowledges, in its own evidence, that there is currently a legislative vacuum to assist in achieving and executing the LGA and RSPCA's plans for effective control of domestic cats and that council, like many, feels a responsibility to fill the void to better support its community and their pets. Of course, in so doing the council is only adding to the inconsistent manner in which cats are dealt with by local governments and only a statewide approach will address this issue.

I think everyone is familiar with this issue. I think everyone has been lobbied by the RSPCA, probably by the LGA, probably by people in their communities. There are issues around adjoining council areas. If I live on one side of the road I will be covered by one set of laws, if I live on the other side I will be covered by another set. I am sure the Hon. Nicola Centofanti will speak to this from her own experience in terms of issues of tethering and containment, what is deemed dangerous, what is not dangerous. Is tethering any more dangerous than containing a cat in a vehicle? There are all sorts of considerations. They are all very contentious and what we know is that we need to address this once and for all.

There is a review that is on the table. I think what we need to do is pause any more by-laws—pardon the pun—but pause the passage of any more by-laws and wait for that review until we can have a statewide approach. I sincerely hope that members from all sides will agree with that position and that we can deal with this once and for all.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. D.G.E. Hood.