Connell Brian: Local Government Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
Connell Brian: Local Government Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:632;Page:3740] 
BRIAN CONNELL (National—Rakaia) 
: 
 Thank you very much; I am exhausted in just seeking the call! Let me start by putting a couple of things right for the record. Doug Woolerton has never been a man to let the truth get in the way of a good story. I looked up the voting pattern in the Committee stage of the Dog Control Amendment Bill and I want the Committee to understand this about when the question was put on “… the amendments as amended set out on Supplementary Order Paper 167 …”. The voting pattern was: New Zealand Labour 52 in favour; New Zealand First 13 in favour; Green Party 9 in favour; and United Future 7 in favour. The Noes consisted of New Zealand National—the entire caucus said no—and Paul Adams from United Future said no as well. 
Gordon Copeland has stood up and bought into those mistruths as well. He read out the voting patterns knowing very well that the National Party voted against this nonsense right from the outset. Well I say to Gordon Copeland that there is an old saying that one can be either a hydrant or a dog. The way that Mr Copeland is being treated by this Government shows that he is the hydrant. 
Jim Sutton then took a call. He told the Committee that this was a registration argument—which was in stark contrast to what the Prime Minister told the House. She said this bill was about trying to stop savage dog attacks but the former Minister of Agriculture argued that it was a registration argument. In retrospect I say to the member that it is no wonder he lost his seat of Aoraki and no wonder he is the former Minister of Agriculture. 
More mystifyingly Damien O’Connor stood up and regaled the Committee about sheep worrying. He said the real reason this bill was brought to Parliament was to do with sheep worrying. I ask the Committee how many people around the country rose up in righteous outrage the last time four or five sheep in a paddock down in mid-Canterbury were attacked. The answer is none. But how many rose up in righteous anger when a child was attacked on a street in one of our cities? Thousands did. Gordon Copeland is voting for legislation that he knows will do absolutely nothing to fix that problem. How that man lies straight in his bed at night I will never know. 
Damien O’Connor then went on with some extraordinary argument about registering salmon. Well I will never look in the same way at the giant salmon statue in Rakaia; I will have nightmares thinking that it is going to come after me. I will have that statue taken down the first time I am back in Rakaia. I cannot have that—I will check and see whether it is chipped in the first place—we just cannot have that. 
I tell members that if a dog is worrying on my property it will be microchipped with a .22. That is the way such dogs should be dealt with. Anyone in this Chamber with a bit of common sense knows that that is the way such dogs should be dealt with. 
Let me say to members that this is not a rural problem; it is an urban problem. Savage dog attacks are out of control. Let me tell the Committee a couple of facts. In New Zealand accident and emergency staff and general practitioners treat around 20 people each day for wounds inflicted by dogs. One person is hospitalised every day as a result of a dog attack and many more incidents go unreported. Cross-breeds like mastiffs Rottweilers and pit bulls account for nearly all of those attacks. Why is that? It is because those dogs are savage. They are bred to do exactly what they do. If we were serious about dealing with this problem we would stop importing those types of dogs we would stop breeding them and we would take those dogs out of circulation. How many more kids have to be attacked before we actually get off our butts—to use an O’Connor-ism—and actually do something?