Animal welfare
Georgie PURCELL (Northern Victoria) (12:56): (130) My question is for the Minister for Environment. Second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides, also known as SGARs, are widely used in Victoria to target rodents. They contain a blood-thinning chemical that can remain active for months, and animals that consume it suffer an excruciating death. Recently there has been an increase in small native animals consuming poisoned rodents, resulting in secondary poisoning. Jennifer, a baby ringtail possum I met in care at Waratah wildlife sanctuary last week, is one such victim. She became infected after consuming her now-deceased mother’s milk. SGARs have been banned in many countries across the world but in Victoria are available for anyone to purchase in supermarkets and hardware stores. It has been argued these dangerous products should not be available for sale to the public or in use at all. Can the minister advise how many native animals are killed by SGARs each year in Victoria?
Members interjecting.
The PRESIDENT: The minister can answer as she sees fit.
Ingrid STITT (Western Metropolitan – Minister for Early Childhood and Pre-Prep, Minister for Environment) (12:57): Thank you, President. I thank Ms Purcell for her question and her advocacy in relation to these important matters. Just by way of background, I should indicate that in Victoria the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action regulates the use of agricultural and veterinary chemicals, so those particular aspects in relation to your question are probably better directed to the Minister for Agriculture, but I am happy to answer your question in relation to the impacts on wildlife. We are absolutely committed to making sure that we do whatever we can to improve the outcomes for and the protection of our precious threatened species. That is why we recently listed poisoning of native wildlife via this particular chemical as a potentially threatening process under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act, and that was following a recommendation that was made to me and the Minister for Agriculture from the scientific advisory committee, which is the normal process undertaken. The listing supports consideration of tighter regulations and management actions to reduce any kind of undesired impact of this particular pesticide on native wildlife.
Georgie PURCELL (Northern Victoria) (12:59): Thank you, Minister, for your response. My supplementary is in relation to regulation. Products that are considered dangerous are often sold behind the counter instead of off the shelf so that consumers can understand the serious impact that they can have. Wildlife advocates believe that moving second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides to behind the counter would help Victorians understand the impact they can have on wildlife and perhaps opt for alternatives. Has the minister considered implementing this change?
Ingrid STITT (Western Metropolitan – Minister for Early Childhood and Pre-Prep, Minister for Environment) (12:59): I thank Ms Purcell for her supplementary question. Following that listing that I just described the process behind, the next step in the process is for my department to prepare an action statement, which would actually go to describing the potentially threatening process and outlining what actions need to be taken to mitigate it. That process only just commenced recently, and I am advised that there will be the development of this action statement and it will take approximately six months. But I am happy to keep you updated on the progress of that process.