Hansard debates

Mrs McARTHUR (Western Victoria) (18:12): My adjournment matter is for the Minister for Agriculture and concerns the registration fees required by the Domestic Animals Act 1994 and administered by that infamous Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions. All Victorian councils are required to run a system of dog and cat registration and to pay the state government $4 for every animal registered. The minister’s response to my question on notice revealed that in 2019 local councils recorded a total of 662 855 dogs and 221 548 cats. By my reckoning, the total sum remitted under this section of the act is therefore more than $3.5 million each year, to be used, according to the statute, for the promotion, by the department, within the state of responsible dog and cat ownership and/or animal welfare. I need to ask the minister to explain exactly how this money has been spent and to consider an alternative proposal for the tax.

Ararat Dog Rescue is a not-for-profit organisation run by volunteers and is dedicated to rescuing dogs and placing them in foster homes until adoption can be arranged. They, like so many other groups across Western Victoria, do a phenomenal job in caring for abandoned and otherwise homeless pet dogs, and they do so voluntarily. My proposition may go some way to help, so I ask the minister to ask his department to work with the Treasurer to develop a program which assists dog and cat rescue centres across the state. This could be simply achieved. The state government could remit the annual fee for any animal adopted from rescue sanctuaries. Doing so would encourage local councils to adopt a similar incentive scheme in their licensing. This would reward those pet owners who look to help abandoned animals while continuing to maintain the current licence fees for pedigree animals and those bought as puppies. Cat and dog rescue centres would then, I believe, find more homes for those animals in need.

I do not pretend this would solve the problem in itself, but I do believe this incentive—effectively reducing state taxation—would be a step in the right direction. Local councils already have the necessary mechanism to waive the fees payable, so I do not believe the administration of this scheme would add any significant burden to them or to the department. The action I seek is for the minister to, first of all, explain how the tax is spent but also to investigate how the government might implement this proposal across Victoria for the benefit of abandoned animals and those who find homes for them.