Banks John: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBanks John: Animal Welfare Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:13056. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon JOHN BANKS (Leader—ACT): I rise this morning to speak in support of the first reading of this Animal Welfare Amendment Bill. This bill is the result of a comprehensive review of our animal welfare laws and I want to thank the Minister for Primary Industries Nathan Guy for his important piece of work. The Animal Welfare Act was passed in 1999 and from day one I knew that this day would arrive—some 14 years later. At the time that the legislation we are amending was progressing through Parliament I told the then National Minister for Food Fibre Biosecurity and Border Control that there were gaping holes in the legislation that needed to be fixed. They were not fixed then; they are being fixed now. The problem we have is that notwithstanding the select committee process that I was witness to 14 years ago the then Minister ran roughshod over public sentiment and submissions to the select committee and barrelled onon the advice of the officials. I told the Government of the day that that was wrong and the people told the Government of the day that it was wrong and here we are trying to fix that wrong. So it is a golden opportunity for this Government and this Parliament to fix some of the wrongs that should have been righted all those years ago.The bill will go some way—some way—to strengthening our standards of animal welfare and protecting animals from ill-treatment. But it also represents a real missed opportunity to take our legal protections for animals a lot further and to be a world leader in the area of animal welfare. I am pleased for instance that there will be a new “low-level” offence for people who hurt animals so we are not focused just on theworst offending. We need to be focused on all offending and this bill addresses just that. I am pleased the new regulations will specify mandatory and enforceable animal welfare standards. I am pleased that the wilful or reckless ill-treatment of wild animals will now be an offence that can be prosecuted. These were issues I raised with the Minister at the time all those years ago so I am pleased that some of them are being addressed in this piece of legislation.I am glad that the killing of an animal to test on it post-mortem and that the breeding of an animal with known or potentially compromised welfare will now need the approval of the National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee. I am not signed up to the proposition that an animal ethics approval committee is a sinecure for the problems we have around the treatment of animals in this country and it will depend entirely on the quality of those individuals who are selected for that important piece of work around the implementation of this piece of legislation. But this bill—as I said all those years ago in Parliament from this seat—could achieve a lot more and should achieve a lot more.Let us start with live exports of animals for slaughter. Currently there are no mandatory standards for live animal exports so it is promising that this bill introduces them. The Government’s current approach to live exports for slaughter is that they are prohibited unless an exemption is granted. An exemption cannot be granted unless New Zealand’s trade reputation can be adequately managed. Well this is not about just a trade reputation; this is about taking into account the suffering of animals and the suffering they go through when they are exported live from sovereign States to be slaughtered overseas. Humane Society International has said: “Every year thousands of dead sheep are thrown overboard as ships depart”—for instance—“Australian ports for the Middle East either whole or minced without care or consideration for the consequences of these actions”. Live animal exports need to be very closely monitored—indeed if they are necessary at all and I not convinced. But let the Primary Production Committee hear evidence on that. Thankfully there are currently no live exports from New Zealand but I would like to encourage the select committee to look very carefully at why the provision for an exemption is even necessary.Most disappointingly this bill totally fails to ban the testing of psychoactive substances on animals. Beagle puppies specifically bred to be used for testing are not being protected by a bill that claims to enhance animal welfare. It is an outrage that an unnecessary chemical could be tested on animals and that in the process the animal will suffer unimaginable pain and a miserable death. New Zealanders made it very clear during the debate on the Psychoactive Substances Bill that they abhor the idea of animals being tortured and killed so that people can take recreational fun drugs. They marched on this Parliament. They signed petitions. They visited members of Parliament. They wrote to the Health Committee to voice their outrage but their outrage fell on deaf ears. Sadly the select committee refused to hear submissions about animal welfare and it told us at the time that it was the wrong bill to address the issue of animal testing. Well this bill is the right bill to address the issue of animal testing. This is the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill and what better bill what better piece of prospective legislation could be more useful for animal welfare than to ensure that psychoactive substances are never tested on animals?Fun drugs should not be tested on animals—full stop. That was the proposition I put to the National Government at the time of the Psychoactive Substances Bill going through this House and to the select committee chairman and to anyone else who would listen. Well this is the right bill and I am glad that the right bill the right vehicle has arrived in Parliament—not at the right time but well overdue. But let us take that as an opportunity. I will be supporting Supplementary Order Paper 341 issued by Trevor Mallard to amend this bill to make it clear that no animal should be used in research ortesting for the purposes of gaining approval for a psychoactive substance. But I also call on those individuals and animal welfare groups to submit to the select committee. This is their opportunity. It is better than a march. It is better than writing letters. It is better than individual members of Parliament being lobbied. Go to the select committee and make your views known. I ask the select committee to listen to New Zealanders on how they feel about animal rights.I want to leave you with a message from animal welfare advocate and Auckland-based lawyerCatrionaMacLennan who has argued that this bill is too timid. I argue that this bill is too timid. I argue that this is the golden time of opportunity in the interests of the animals that we are responsible for caring for while we share the Earth with them. This is what she said. She suggested that the bill should “start with a very basic statement: that animals are in fact living beings rather than inanimate objects.” Animals are living beings—I think all New Zealanders can agree on that sentiment. Animals also feel pain and we have a duty to protect them. So I say to the chairman of the select committee as you go into your deliberations remember that animals have a right to live alongside us on this Earth. They feel pain and we need to protect them.