3News » Home
Full Story

Govt 'highly likely' to adopt animal cruelty bill - Key

8 comments | Post Comment email Email printer friendly Print    Text Size:
aA
aA
aA
The bill comes after 33 dogs were killed near Wellsford, north of Auckland, last week (NZ Herald)

The bill comes after 33 dogs were killed near Wellsford, north of Auckland, last week (NZ Herald)

Tue, 02 Feb 2010 5:30a.m.

The National Party caucus is "highly likely" to agree today to turn a member's bill raising the penalty for animal cruelty into a government bill, Prime Minister John Key says.

Tauranga MP Simon Bridges drafted the bill to increase maximum sentences for animal cruelty from three to five years, but as a member's bill it would progress very slowly and could take years to enact.

Turning it into a Government bill means it could go onto Parliament's agenda immediately and could be debated later this month.

"It's a matter that concerns New Zealanders and clearly other political parties share our view that we need to have a look at this issue," Mr Key said yesterday at his post-cabinet press conference.

"I think it's highly likely that caucus will adopt the bill."

Mr Key said it would then go to a select committee after its first reading in Parliament, and other issues around animal cruelty could be considered as well as sentences.

"It's a very short bill, so we will need to look at some other issues in that particular space," he said.

"But the broad principle and thrust of the suggestions by Simon Bridges seem to be in line with our views."

There have been recent high profile cases of cruelty to animals, including the slaughter of 33 dogs near Wellsford, north of Auckland, last week.

The Labour Party says it supports the bill in principle and the Greens are also in favour of it.

Green Party MP Sue Kedgley said yesterday the Government should also make cruel practices like keeping pigs in crates and chickens in battery cages illegal.

"We need to make certain that any legislation covers all forms of animal abuse, including institutional abuse such as keeping pigs and hens in cages for the duration of their lives - those practices are legal," she said.

Farmers also should be punished for individual cases of cruelty, she said.

There had been several cases of farmers starving cattle but escaping with fines or community sentences.

Earlier yesterday Mr Key said there had been "some horrible cases" of animal cruelty, which he described as barbaric behaviour.

"Only 1 percent of people who have undertaken cruel acts against an animal have been prosecuted and only three percent (of them) have been sent to prison," he said.

"What we would be doing (by passing the bill) is the Government and Parliament sending a message to the judiciary that we take this seriously."

National is holding an all-day caucus meeting today at Premier House, Mr Key's official residence.

MPs will be told about the Government's plans for the year and its thinking on issues like changes to the tax system.

NZPA

 

The National Party caucus is "highly likely" to agree today to turn a member's bill raising the penalty for animal cruelty into a government bill, Prime Minister John Key says.

Tauranga MP Simon Bridges drafted the bill to increase maximum sentences for animal cruelty from three to five years, but as a member's bill it would progress very slowly and could take years to enact.

Turning it into a Government bill means it could go onto Parliament's agenda immediately and could be debated later this month.

"It's a matter that concerns New Zealanders and clearly other political parties share our view that we need to have a look at this issue," Mr Key said yesterday at his post-cabinet press conference.

"I think it's highly likely that caucus will adopt the bill."

Mr Key said it would then go to a select committee after its first reading in Parliament, and other issues around animal cruelty could be considered as well as sentences.

"It's a very short bill, so we will need to look at some other issues in that particular space," he said.

"But the broad principle and thrust of the suggestions by Simon Bridges seem to be in line with our views."

There have been recent high profile cases of cruelty to animals, including the slaughter of 33 dogs near Wellsford, north of Auckland, last week.

The Labour Party says it supports the bill in principle and the Greens are also in favour of it.

Green Party MP Sue Kedgley said yesterday the Government should also make cruel practices like keeping pigs in crates and chickens in battery cages illegal.

"We need to make certain that any legislation covers all forms of animal abuse, including institutional abuse such as keeping pigs and hens in cages for the duration of their lives - those practices are legal," she said.

Farmers also should be punished for individual cases of cruelty, she said.

There had been several cases of farmers starving cattle but escaping with fines or community sentences.

Earlier yesterday Mr Key said there had been "some horrible cases" of animal cruelty, which he described as barbaric behaviour.

"Only 1 percent of people who have undertaken cruel acts against an animal have been prosecuted and only three percent (of them) have been sent to prison," he said.

"What we would be doing (by passing the bill) is the Government and Parliament sending a message to the judiciary that we take this seriously."

National is holding an all-day caucus meeting today at Premier House, Mr Key's official residence.

MPs will be told about the Government's plans for the year and its thinking on issues like changes to the tax system.

NZPA

 

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Comments [8]

2fewrecipies
18 Feb 2010 9:08p.m.

Just put 2 + 2 together and realised he's the jumped-up-young-gun on Breakfast. Winston P would have got to the bottom of this whole animal abuse scandal after a Chep Jellimeat box enquiry and then campaign to have stays sent back home, Pitts to the USA etc ...

kim
17 Feb 2010 9:03p.m.

My opinion is.. this is just a way of raiseing a unknowns mp profile in public to try and retain the tauranga seat. I mean really .. the max fine for this type of offending is already 3 yr in prison and a $50000 fine. Don't get me wrong i'm not against it but it really is just fiddling with the sentences to make it look like nice Mr Bridges cares about animals. If he really cared about animals he would be pushing for more funding for the spca not trying to prove he's great by pushing a bill that will have no effect on offending rates.
Anyone wanna bet he didn't actually write this bill. Most likely he was just giving credit for it to raise his profile.
I live in Tauranga and the general feeling here is he's a jumped up pratt that would attend the opening of a coke bottle if it raised his profile.

2fewrecipies
06 Feb 2010 10:30a.m.

Sounds like these dogs were kept in conditions similar to http://www.wspa-international.org/wspaswork/dogs/dogmeattrade/default.aspx so need to limit the number and condition where more than 2 dogs kept as I wonder what the real reason this guy had so many dogs in the first place and how he funded their 'care'?

TH
03 Feb 2010 2:21p.m.

JD these animals have been around longer than humans just because we have the power to remove them (hence why some kids of animals are extinct or becoming extinct) doesnt mean we have to do it, why not put higher fences around your seedlings or deal with it more humanely - put yourself in the animals hoofs/paws/claws etc would you want to be slaughtered because you didnt know what was right from wrong in the humans eyes? they only know their animal instinct and we punish them for doing what they have done for hundreds and hundreds of years!!

2fewrecipies
02 Feb 2010 7:32p.m.

After reading the illogical, vengeful, emotive posts from “animal lovers”, they talk of animal-murder, life sentences, the death penalty and even death threats. Would it not make more sense to legislate against idiots and the simple-minded from having access to animals in the first place as opposed to topping up the prison system. I just see Nats going for an easy vote catchment. But they need to be careful, they are going to let these voters down …

Scott
02 Feb 2010 5:36p.m.

I could not agree more, JD. In the case of the dogs, emotions have taken over from due process of law. That may well suit activists but it has no place in a court of law.
If these emotions continue, and in this case it is all at the expense of 2 people, then I guess you have no option but to ring the SPCA and let them deal with the various problems.

JD
02 Feb 2010 5:06p.m.

So who defines exactly what is considered cruel? If I shoot 40 wild goats with my shotgun, because they are chomping down on my young pine seedlings, is that considered cruel under this new law. To some it would seem that way, as the most efficient way to ensure you kill the whole mob in one session, is to shoot to wound a young animal, so that its cries will draw out the rest of the mob, then bang bang, its all over. Or when I trap 50 possums and dispatch them with a hammer, is that now cruelty. How about shooting wild cats that were once domesticated, but since dumped into the wild, is that cruel. Sounds like another knee-jerk reaction law that has not been well thought through.

Rintintin
02 Feb 2010 8:37a.m.

I did not know that there was a court case about the 33 dogs and that the Judge has ruled.

Post a comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide here
Name:
Email: (Won't be published)
Comment:



3News Video 3News Audio