Copeland Gordon: Local Government Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
Copeland Gordon: Local Government Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:632;Page:3736] 
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
: 
 I begin by informing the Committee that I did look up the  
Hansard 
 of 2003 when the amendment to the Dog Control Act came into being. As my friend Doug Woolerton has correctly stated if we look at it and ask ourselves whether Labour voted for microchipping we see the answer is yes. Did the Progressives vote for microchipping? The answer is yes. Did United Future vote for microchipping? The answer is yes. Did New Zealand First vote for microchipping? The answer is yes. Did the Green Party vote for microchipping? The answer is yes. Did the National Party vote for microchipping? The answer is yes. There was only one party in this House that on the third reading of that bill—[ 
Interruption 
] I tell David Carter to go and look at  
Hansard 
 and he will see that the only party that voted against the bill on its third reading was the ACT party. The Maori Party was not here at that stage but I am sure that if it had been here its members would have been convinced by the arguments too. 
Let us put some facts on the table about what happened in 2003. Essentially United Future has not changed its position since 2003—unlike the Greens who have done a complete backflip. There is no disputing that they voted for the amendment in 2003 and now they are totally against it. They said we got it wrong. I do not believe we got it wrong; I believe we got it significantly right. However I have an open mind and a common-sense mind. When Federated Farmers came to me earlier this year and made a case for exempting working farm dogs from microchipping and I heard their figures and saw the facts of the situation—that 40 percent of all dogs are responsible for 2 percent of dog attacks—I thought that yes they had a good case. Immediately we decided as a caucus that we would work towards an exemption for working farm dogs and that has been our position from that day to this notwithstanding the comments to the contrary from some of our opponents. 
I will let the record show this too. If we go back and look—and the media are quite aware of this—who do we see was the first person to suggest a Supplementary Order Paper to exempt working farm dogs from microchipping? I was. I was the first person to come up with that idea and David Carter who had not thought of that idea jumped on to the bandwagon very very quickly. So tonight I want to thank the National Party members for their endorsement of the common-sense position we initiated. Those are the facts and those members can talk about them as much as they like but the media are aware of that situation. We have led this issue from day one because it does make common sense. I think the clever little slogan of “one law for all dogs” is just that—it is a clever slogan. It is a bit like a bumper sticker. It does not depend on much logic or analysis. For that reason I will be voting for David Carter’s Supplementary Order Paper tonight and I hope that National Party members will vote for mine. 
Hon David Carter 
: Both of them? 
GORDON COPELAND 
: I will vote only for the first one. 
So let us again put a few facts on the record. These are the facts. If any member wants to refute them I encourage him or her to take a call and I will be happy to hear it. New South Wales introduced a microchipping regime in 1999—at about this time of the year I think. It has now been going for 7 years. In 1997 before that was done there were 521 dog attacks in New South Wales. What has happened since then? In 2003 which is the latest figure we have there were 167 dog attacks. Why? I will tell members. A lot of people have asked me how it works. It is very simple really. In 7 years from now all the dogs in New Zealand will be microchipped—and if I had my way we would exempt working farm dogs but it looks as though that will not happen. With that situation immediately an unsupervised dog is found without a microchip it is put down on the spot. That is how microchipping works and that is why it works. Nobody here really has their mind around why it works but it works because unsupervised dogs are put down. I tell members that once a farmer loses an expensive well-trained dog to a .22 rifle or an injection microchipping will take off in the farming community like we would not believe. 
I am really disappointed that so many people in this House including particularly the Labour Government New Zealand First and the Greens do not become a bit more pragmatic because the fact of the matter is that Federated Farmers have dug their toes in. They have said they will have a campaign of civil disobedience and I for one believe them. We have councils that say they will give microchipping a low priority and I for one believe them. All we had to do was the common-sense thing and make microchipping voluntary for working farm dogs.