2015-09-15
Mr BARBER (Northern Metropolitan) — My question is also for the Minister for Agriculture, but it is not about Leadbeater's possum; it is about other native fauna.
Information provided to the minister by Zoos Victoria and the network of wildlife rescuers in Victoria is that hundreds of animals are being caught every year in backyard fruit netting. These are the nets often being sold cheaply through various stores that do not meet the standards and recommendations that the minister's own department puts out there for wildlife-friendly netting. It must be taking a huge toll on wildlife, including the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988-listed grey-headed flying fox, not to mention the distress for members of the community who, often on a voluntary basis, have to go out and rescue these animals. Can the minister tell me what her assessment of the situation is here and what she is able to do about this?
Ms PULFORD (Minister for Agriculture) — I thank Mr Barber for his question and his interest in this issue, which is an issue that has indeed affected a great many Victorians who are involved in wildlife rescue and who are concerned about this important animal welfare issue.
The type of netting that Mr Barber talks about that is considered to be wildlife-safe netting — just for background for members — is netting with a 5-by-5 millimetre aperture or less. Very fine with closed holes is the type of netting that is wildlife safe. The department publishes a guideline indicating that this is the better and recommended type of netting to be used. Indeed the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee, that advises the government on these issues, provided advice to the former government on this question and indicated that there is a responsibility for the whole community in dealing with this issue. There is a role for consumers and indeed a role for organisations that sell netting.
I note and acknowledge the work of people who have campaigned for change in this issue in bringing a greater awareness to those people who are selling netting to make sure that consumers are well informed and the products that they are providing are appropriate.
The question of what to do about it next is one that is under active consideration. Whilst the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986 has codes, it does not have a regulation-making power as such. What I can indicate to Mr Barber is that options are being investigated to regulate for wildlife-safe netting, and I hope to be in a position to provide Mr Barber and the house with an update on that in due course.
Mr BARBER (Northern Metropolitan) — Because the grey-headed flying fox is already listed under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act, the minister has the power to issue an interim conservation order under section 27 that would allow for the prohibition or regulation of any activity or process which takes place within the critical habitat which is the subject of the order. That seems to be an extraordinarily wide power which the minister could deploy immediately to create either a ban or a phase-out followed by a ban on the wrong type of netting. I call on the minister to do so. Is it possible that this particular section of the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act could be used in the way that I put forward?
Ms PULFORD (Minister for Agriculture) — I thank Mr Barber for his supplementary question. As I indicated, this is a matter that is under active consideration. My advice is that to create the type of regulation that the people campaigning for change on this issue are calling for would require an amendment to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. We are looking into ways that we may be able to resolve this more quickly. I thank the member for his question and would hope to be in a position to provide the house with an update on making some change in this respect before too long.