Wednesday, 18 October 2023

Motions

Family violence animal welfare

Georgie PURCELL (Northern Victoria) (09:54): I move:

That this house notes that:

(1) companion animal abuse is a form of family and domestic violence (FDV);

(2) studies show women with companion animals have reported threatened or deliberate animal abuse in up to 53 per cent of FDV situations;

(3) concern for the welfare of companion animals is a significant contributor to women and children remaining in violent homes;

(4) the property status of animals under the current legislation makes it easy for perpetrators to acquire and maintain ownership of pets for use in coercive control;

(5) emerging research shows clear links between animal cruelty and the increased likelihood of violence against humans;

(6) in 2020 the government supported a motion to better protect companion animals and victim-survivors in situations of FDV;

and calls on the government to investigate amending the Family Violence Protection Act 2008 to include a specific offence for cruelty to animals as a form of early intervention and to further investigate the link between violence towards animals and humans in order to make appropriate reforms.

As we have all heard here just this morning in everyone’s wonderful contributions about Sprite, it is not news that we Victorians consider our companion animals to be family, evidenced by the many dogs in my own office and the many that walk the hallways in this place too. We simply cannot leave them at home for long periods of time, just as we would not with a human child. There is currently a movement for dogs to be allowed in pubs with the rest of our family and friends and, as I mentioned last week, an increase in pet-friendly hotels.

For a growing number of us, including me, choosing not to have human children is becoming more and more normalised, because we already have kids – they just happen to walk on four legs. In fact in my case I consider dogs, cats, equines, ovines and bovines all part of my family at home, and after being an MP for less than a year, I know too that this is true for many of my constituents. In turn they want to see them better protected. So when considering the RSPCA statistic that one in three women delay leaving family violence situations due to legitimate fear of harm to their companion animals, I am alarmed, and it is my hope today that we can change this. An Australian study has revealed over half of women in violent relationships reported their partner had threatened to hurt or deliberately kill a family pet. Perpetrators are exploiting companion animals as tools of manipulation and for coercion, often simultaneously to other methods of coercive control, including limiting access to finances and monitoring of phone calls.

We owe it to animals to do our best for them every single day, and that means responding rapidly when information about cruelty and violence surfaces, and it means reforming laws that are no longer strong or fit for purpose when research and evidence like this emerge. But this is not just about protecting pets today, it is about early intervention to protect people too. It is for the safety of animals and for the safety of women and children, and that is why we must act now.

While I commend the government for listening and for working towards family violence reforms, particularly since the royal commission in Victoria, this motion outlines the more complex work that must be done in this space. If we are serious about ending family violence in Victoria, we must understand what experts have called ‘the link’. As the Animal Legal Defense Fund has stated:

People who hurt animals don’t stop with animals. There is an established link between cruelty to animals and violence toward humans – regularly referred to as “The Link.”

This link makes it critically important that cruelty toward animals be taken seriously by law enforcement, and by society at large.

This will result in better outcomes for women and animals – safer outcomes. The Victorian government has acknowledged the link in the past and in 2021, following calls from the Animal Justice Party, committed to $1.3 million to protect companion animals from family violence when this house unanimously passed another motion on this very topic. While there has been investment in pet-friendly crisis accommodation and other upgrades since then, there still has not been legislative protection for pets put into our family violence act in this state. It means we have only acted to protect pets and people after violence has occurred, rather than acting to stop it at its source with a method of early intervention.

It is time today in this place for the Allan government to commit to changing that, just as New South Wales did years ago. It is crucial because research points unequivocally to the link between animal abuse and family violence. Animal cruelty occurs more frequently where family violence is also occurring, and we cannot deny that any further: 76 per cent of animal abusers also abuse a family member, 70 per cent of animal abusers have criminal records and more than 50 per cent of schoolyard shooters have histories of animal cruelty, according to many US studies. If the animals in our homes are not safe, then it is more than likely that neither are the people.

In 2021 the ABC published the story of Jennifer Howard, who, like many women experiencing family and domestic violence, was unable to leave because there were no housing options to take her dogs, leaving her stuck with a man who physically and mentally abused her. Eventually the situation became too dangerous and she escaped with her children but was forced to leave her dogs behind. Jennifer went on to establish the widely regarded not-for-profit organisation Safe Pets Safe Families, which provides emergency services for people and their pets fleeing FDV in South Australia. The tireless work of family violence prevention groups in Victoria includes Pets of the Homeless, Safe Steps and Lucy’s Project, and it is astounding to see the work that they have done. It is unfortunate that situations like Jennifer’s are not unique and that charities are born out of human and animal suffering that could have already been improved with a simple legislative change.

On Monday just past I posted my intention of introducing and debating this motion today on my social media. In the following hours I was flooded with messages from women wanting to share their own personal experience with family and domestic violence and how their defenceless companion animals were also abused and used against them in acts of coercive control. I would like to now tell two of those stories that have been shared with me by brave and resilient women – with their full consent – who, thankfully, made it out of their violent homes alive:

… when I was 18, I experienced my first encounter with domestic violence … My boyfriend at the time became physically, emotionally, and sexually abusive, but I didn’t initially recognize the signs. Our relationship progressed rapidly, and he convinced me to move to a different state with him for a job opportunity. Against my better judgment, we also acquired two 9-week-old kittens … even though our rental didn’t permit pets. Looking back, I understand that this was a tactic used by him to manipulate and control me …

A few weeks later, I managed to escape from him, but I couldn’t take the kittens with me as I fled for my life. He had –

already –

destroyed all my belongings … He attempted to manipulate me into returning by saying that I’d be homeless because we had obtained the kittens without informing the real estate … he sent self-harming messages to me and my new employer as a means to guilt-trip me for leaving him and it demonstrated that any efforts to collect my kittens would be futile. When I didn’t respond, he continued to message me … telling me that he had drowned the kittens.

A few days later, I … returned to the property and found our kittens in the shed, without food or water, in the freezing winter cold. Fortunately, I was able to secure accommodation in a local women’s shelter, as I had finally sought help from the police. At the time, the RSPCA provided crisis accommodation for my kittens. Even with this support, I –

still –

faced numerous challenges …

And:

In my recent marriage, there was a history of domestic violence, and we had two dogs … who meant a lot to both me and my young daughter. However, my husband was cruel and neglectful towards the dogs. He seemed to view them as an extension of his ego rather than as beloved pets …

As I planned to leave due to ongoing abuse, I had to come to terms with the possibility of leaving the dogs behind if I sought shelter or a rental for myself and my child. When my husband found out I left, he threatening to dump the dogs, claiming he couldn’t handle them on his own. I tried to arrange temporary housing for the dogs while I looked for a pet-friendly rental, but he changed his stance and then denied me access to them. He used every negotiation as a tool to manipulate me into returning and instil fear and urgency in me.

I lived in constant fear that he would harm the dogs or himself (as he had in the past) in retaliation for my departure. On one occasion, he deliberately let the dogs loose, causing them to create issues on a neighbouring farm and attack livestock … He threatened that debt collectors would come after me if I didn’t pay the fine.

I want to thank these brave women for sharing these experiences with me for me to share with you all today, but I also must say that these experiences are not unique and highlight the urgent need for coercive control involving animals to be recognised and for assistance to help victims temporarily house their pets while escaping life-threatening situations.

If this motion is passed today, and I sincerely hope it is, Victoria will be only the second state after New South Wales to acknowledge the importance of the protection of animals for women’s and children’s safety. By comparison, more than two-thirds of US states have enacted legislation that includes provisions for pets in domestic violence protection orders. By protecting animals in situations of family violence, we remove one of the biggest barriers to escaping a violent home. This is early intervention. But there is still so much more work to be done. Early intervention is key in protecting people from family and domestic violence. It is therefore pertinent that animals are protected under the Family Violence Protection Act 2008 for better and safer outcomes for both women and animals. I hope that the government can commit to these increased protections for women, children and animals today. I look forward to support from colleagues across the political spectrum and the entire chamber to do not only what is right by animals, women and children but what is expected by the majority of our society, and I commend the motion to the house.

Tom McINTOSH (Eastern Victoria) (10:07): I rise to support the motion put by Ms Purcell. It is an incredibly important issue and one that picks up on something that I am incredibly proud of: what this government has done over the last seven to eight years in the area of family violence. I think it takes another important step on the path to ensuring that we are not only preventing but dealing with situations of family violence in as many possible ways as we can, because as we know, as we have just heard in Ms Purcell’s contribution, there are so many ways that coercion and control can be perpetrated, and we must remove all of those. It is also to absolutely recognise that cruelty to animals in any form is not on.

In 2015 the government announced that there would be a royal commission into family violence, which commenced in 2016. For me it is one of the incredible pieces of work of the Andrews government: to lead the nation in an issue that is so systemic in effectively putting trauma into our communities, into homes, into families and is having such a negative impact on Victorians, Australians and indeed people worldwide. Family violence is just such a nasty, horrific thing, particularly when people feel trapped in a situation they cannot get out of. Coming back to that word ‘trauma’, whether it be a partner or the trauma that is building in children if it is a family situation, it is something I am so proud this government has led the nation on dealing with: the 227 recommendations that came from that royal commission and the work that was done, whether that be with our police and our family courts; setting up Orange Door, ensuring that victims have pathways; and to go back a bit, to first of all starting the conversation to ensure that victims have more capacity, as we just heard in the last contribution, to identify behaviours that are leading to family violence. When those behaviours are identified, victims are then able to reach out to support services and identify what is going on and where necessary make other arrangements. That is through the support services, whether that is getting into housing or getting help within the home to ensure that the behaviour stops – whatever it is within those 227 recommendations – and the $3.4 billion investment to ensure that we are stopping family violence in its tracks.

I am a big believer in removing generational trauma to see the best of ourselves in the kids that grow into our adults so they can be productive, to reduce mental health issues. Again, I am so proud that we had the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System. For kids who are living in family violence situations, it is a constant stress upon them. Something that I want to pick up out of this motion today is that, for some of those kids, pets can be an absolute place of safety for them. Kids can absolutely depend on pets as a piece of continuity in their lives and continuity in childhood. Kids that, for example, go into foster care lose everything that surrounds them, things that we might take for granted – the bedroom surrounds, the smell of the home, the foods they normally like to eat – and of course another big one is if they have a pet, that is left behind. Likewise, in a family violence situation, whether it is the victim or the children in the family, that ability to take a pet out of that situation I think is really, really important and should not be overlooked.

It cannot be overstated how much Australians love pets. We have just heard contributions this morning around Sprite, on a bit more of a light-hearted note. But in absolute seriousness, what pets do for people, whether it is from a physical health perspective in getting out and walking them and this sort of thing or a mental health perspective through the benefits of getting physical, getting active, having set routines and then getting out and talking to other people – I mean, whether it is dog owners or various pet owners, when they are out and about with their groups or just out in parks, people meet, get together, talk and share. It is really an incredible thing, and you only have to look at pet ownership numbers that have come out of the pet census to see how much people love their pets. But the why behind that – why do they love their pets? Because it is that deep, deep emotional connection, and it is that deep emotional connection that we do not want to see manipulated. We do not want to see coercive behaviour around victims in these situations.

Just coming back to that point of identifying behaviours early, Ms Purcell raised the fact that people that are cruel to animals are more likely to show the same behaviour to humans and to engage in a family violence situation. If this is another way that we can prevent violence to animals, we can prevent this coercive behaviour – we can get in, identify and deal with the behaviours or stop the situation – then this is another great way of preventing and removing trauma, this trauma that we know is going to come from this situation. And of course, as we know, it can be so much worse than simply emotional trauma; it can lead in the worst of circumstances to death.

The Family Violence Protection Act 2008: we know that there has been so much work done on it through the royal commission to lead us to all of the recommendations that came out of the royal commission – the services that were put in around housing to ensure that victims have somewhere safe to go and the services around financial counselling, because again, coming back to coercive behaviours, financial coercion has been an incredibly, incredibly strong one. The funding allocation and the resources and expertise we have put into our financial counsellors have been an incredible resource to enable people to have (1) the strength but (2) simply the financial capacity to leave relationships that they should not be in.

Coming back to that next generation, that generational change, the relationship programs that have been in our schools to help to identify what is healthy and what is not healthy in a relationship and other laws that are being passed around ensuring safe and respectful relationships – these all lead to a point where relationships should be healthy and should be respectful and where we should not be seeing family violence in these situations.

Again, I would just like to support this motion to ensure the welfare of animals. As I said earlier, it is critically important that through this we see another way to identify and intervene early and for behaviours to be noted. Ms Purcell talked about the two examples of victims noticing behaviours through the behaviour towards pets and that coercive control, but we need to ensure that that can lead somewhere, so that a potential victim can have their story heard and can have actions taken so that they and their pets can safely be removed from the situation, ensuring that they do not become another statistic in a statistic that has been far too high across Victoria and Australia for too long.

Renee HEATH (Eastern Victoria) (10:17): I rise to speak on Ms Purcell’s motion on companion animals and family violence. This is a very interesting topic, and the more that I read about it the more interested I became, but I saw the importance of it too. What stood out to me most was what Ms Purcell referred to as the link, which is a staggeringly strong connection between violence towards animals and family and domestic violence. Overall, the number of family incidents recorded by Victorian police increased by 6 per cent, from 82,205 in 2019–20 to 93,440 in 2020–21. Large increases were seen in the number of reported incidents between former partners and where the victim was a child and the alleged perpetrator was a family member. Every year these numbers seem to increase, and unfortunately this is something where we have to be able to look out for the signs more and more so we can support family, friends and community members that could be looking to us for help. On average police attend a family violence incident every 6 minutes. Violent behaviour is not normal, but it is extremely common. And family violence should never be tolerated.

I was staggered as I began to look through the research – and there is an awful lot of it – to find that surveys show domestic violence survivors revealed that up to 89 per cent of the perpetrators threatened, harmed or killed animals first – 89 per cent. That to me is just amazing and something that cannot be overlooked. The animal welfare report reports that animal abuse frequently occurs in the same households as family violence such as child abuse, elder abuse and sibling violence.

What fascinated me was an article called ‘Animal cruelty, pet abuse and violence: the missed dangerous connection’ by Scott Johnson, who is a psychologist from the USA. He said:

The mistreatment and abuse of animals is a significant indicator of violence towards humans, up to and including intimate partner abuse, sexual assault, rape, murder.

It is quite serious. The literature supports that animal cruelty is one of the earliest markers for future acts of both violent and non-violent criminal behaviours. It is quite staggering.

The second thing I want to talk about – and I got some information from the RSPCA on this one – is the effects that it has on children. It says:

In some households affected by domestic violence where animal abuse also occurs, not only does this lead to animal suffering but can also impact significantly on family members, particularly children, who –

are sometimes –

… forced to witness and/or participate in acts of animal cruelty. This can have a profound effect on children and –

leads to a continuing –

… cycle of animal abuse.

…

Children in particular, often rely on their pet to provide stability, security and companionship.

The third thing that I want to speak to is the spin-off effects that this can have on children growing up, who can become then violent offenders. Because domestic abuse is directed towards powerless animals, child abuse often goes hand in hand with it. Parents who neglect an animal’s need and proper care often abuse their own children and animals alike. Children who abuse animals might be repeating lessons that they have learned at home. Abusing children might have learned that from their parents by witnessing it, and it could lead to more frustration and anxiety and more violence.

It can lead to some very serious spin-off effects. Number four: research from the 1980s to the present has demonstrated that cruelty towards animals is a hallmark or signature indicator for future acts of violence, including rape, child molestation, domestic abuse, school shootings and other forms of violence. If somebody can be abusive or cruel to animals, it makes sense that they could often use the same aggressive behaviour towards people. That is with children. With adults it is equally serious. Those who engage in animal cruelty are three times more likely to commit crimes, including murder, rape, robbery, assault, harassment and threats and other abuses.

This is an extremely serious thing that we have really got a look at, because cruelty to animals in children is a huge indicator that they seriously need help, and often professional help. Cruelty to animals is often first reported when children are four to six years old. Unfortunately, parents often under-report this abusive behaviour towards animals because they do not understand what is going on, and children who demonstrate cruelty to animals often show uncaring and unemotional traits. This is often a sign that they are witnessing abuse or involved in being abused themselves. If they are seeing it done to animals, they might be seeing it done to other family members. What unfortunately is shown in the research is there is such a strong link between them first abusing animals and then going on and abusing maybe other schoolchildren, family or friends. Then as they grow older they can become domestic abuse perpetrators. It is extremely serious.

People can use animal abuse as a way to psychologically abuse children. This is one of the things that I found most disturbing. Domestic abusers and child abusers also engage in animal cruelty as a means to control and further intimidate their victims. Harming the family pet is an effective way to instil fear and secrecy in victims, and even killing the pet effectively teaches the victim that they could just as easily be killed or seriously hurt. That is extremely messed up. That is psychologically abusive and something that children may never recover from.

Children experience trauma and an incredible sense of helplessness when they see this, and this is not a good start for the next generation. Children who harm animals may be victims of sexual abuse. This is something that needs to be taken seriously, and those children need to be referred for help. Children who were sexually abused are more likely to be cruel to animals. That is a scientific well-researched fact, and I just find that absolutely staggering. So there are some very interesting facts about what Ms Purcell calls ‘the link’.

I have got a minute and a half left, so I just want to close by talking about the benefits of companion pets. Companion pets – the research shows that they can reduce stress, they can reduce feelings of loneliness and depression and they can facilitate social connection. My sister about 10 years ago was seriously sick. It was an extremely tough time in our lives – not just for her, but mostly of course for her. But as a sister sitting back, not knowing what to do and being helpless over this situation, I finally decided to buy her the most beautiful British shorthair kitten named Chicago. We were not really cat people at all before this; in fact I am wildly allergic. But that cat now is about 15 years old – oh, my gosh, it must have been about 15 years ago that she was sick – and is the most pampered member of our family. It is unbelievable. We have so much loyalty towards Chicago because of the way he was able to really help in my sister’s healing process. So thank you, Ms Purcell, for bringing this up, and a shout-out to Chicago, our family cat.

Aiv PUGLIELLI (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (10:27): I welcome the debate on this issue, and I commend Ms Purcell for bringing it to this chamber. I will note from the outset that the Greens will be supporting this motion, which calls on the government to further investigate the links between animal abuse and family violence. There are a number of reasons for our support.

First, the Greens policy platform informs our response to this motion. It has been our policy for decades that animals must be recognised as sentient beings that deserve our care and our respect. Animals have intrinsic value separate from the needs of humans, and our policy and legal frameworks should support that. Our policy outlines that humans have a duty of care to minimise physical and psychological suffering of animals resulting from human activity and that strong animal welfare standards and laws are necessary. I believe that this motion speaks to all of these principles.

Second, there is a clear evidence base in reputable published literature that violence and cruelty against animals are widely recognised as both a risk factor for and a potential consequence of family violence. These studies are published across disciplines, including in journals of veterinary science as well as those addressing family studies and human violence. As one example, a study published in the Irish Veterinary Journal found that violence towards family pets was a predictor of future family violence and that:

Eighty seven per cent of women felt a facility to accommodate pets would have made their decision to leave the family home easier.

In Australia Community Legal Centres NSW reported that:

Up to 70% of domestic violence victims-survivors report abuse of a companion or other animal by the perpetrator.

So we, the Greens, believe that there is sufficient evidence on this matter that warrants an investigation about effective policy and legislative responses. I do note that frameworks addressing family violence recognise that the complexity of the issue requires a multidisciplinary approach in response. Surely, if we are serious about reducing levels of family violence across Victoria, we should be investigating all early predictors of that violence, and it is clear that animal violence is an early predictor that warrants further study and action.

We do remember and commend the work on preventing and reducing family violence that Fiona Richardson led for the government as the minister for family violence prevention. Victoria now has a number of policy and legislative responses in place that were previously missing. That work built on the sector’s experience that a problem such as family violence requires a cohesive and multidisciplinary approach. I would encourage the Labor government to extend that same lens and bring animal welfare into the framework. This would incorporate input from medical and health staff, veterinarians, other healthcare professionals and community and social workers. Any lever that we are not already using that could potentially reduce family violence and reduce the levels of violence and abuse against animals surely deserves attention and investigation. I commend this motion to the house.

Michael GALEA (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (10:30): I also rise to speak on this splendid motion, and a very important motion it is as well. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Ms Purcell for raising it. I do note, and as she has already discussed in the wording of her motion too, that there has been a little bit of movement previously. I understand in 2020 the government did support a motion brought into this place by Ms Purcell’s predecessor Mr Meddick, which was calling for support for companion animals as victim-survivors of family and domestic violence, FDV. This is an issue that touches many people greatly, and this is an issue that touches all of us in some way or another.

I do not wish to reiterate what other speakers have said, but it is really worth emphasising that for so many of us pets are our family members. There is a statistic I have seen that says 61 per cent of Australians consider their pets to be family, and frankly I am surprised that is not 91 per cent or higher. I am not sure how that 39 per cent of people interact with their pets, but I know in my household our three pets are certainly a dear and integral part of our family. They certainly enrich our lives in ways that we probably could not have even anticipated before we got them, and we are very, very lucky to have them.

The issue of family violence is one that has plagued our nation, and frankly well beyond that too, for a long time. In recent years and recent decades but especially in recent years we have seen a much greater awareness of this issue. We have seen a much greater willingness of governments to confront the issue and to acknowledge it as an issue. For too long it was considered to be behind closed doors ‍– private business. Family violence does affect us all, and it weakens us as a society. It weakens us if we let it happen. As I believe Mr McIntosh referenced earlier, it was very pleasing to see quite some time ago now this government lead the nation in setting up the Royal Commission into Family Violence and acting on those recommendations as well. We have come a long way in what is still in the scheme of things a relatively short space of time in this state, but we always, always have more to do.

The motion brought into this house today by Ms Purcell is to me a very reasonable extension of that work and something that we should absolutely be looking at in terms of how this can interact with the family and domestic violence support that we provide to people, because our pets are our family. We would not ask, for example, a woman leaving a situation of domestic family violence to leave their children behind, and we should not ask them to leave their pets behind either. The decision would be absolutely gut-wrenching – you could not. You could not leave your children, you could not leave your pets – they are your family. And you could not be safe. As I said, there are many different facets to this, but how can you be safe if your loved one is under threat, if you are worried by the fact that by your leaving your loved one might even be under a more serious threat because you cannot be there to look after them? Those examples that Ms Purcell gave earlier were also very powerful and really strike at the heart of what is at stake here.

Cruelty to animals has to be one of the darkest, most horrible things that any person can do. We have talked about some very horrific things in this chamber already this week, and looking at the notice paper for today, I suspect we will be later this afternoon as well. But cruelty to animals from a human: we can discuss the merits or otherwise of recreational activities or meat consumption or various other aspects – whilst I am a meat eater, and I do not resile from that, I acknowledge there is some disconnect within me over the process of how I eat meat – there is a very stark difference between the use of an animal, for want of a better word, whether it be for food or other purposes, and unprovoked, unrequired, pure cruelty. It is a horrific and a heinous thing for any person to do. It is a heinous thing too to inflict on the animal, and that is probably the point at which I first approach this from; for a defenceless cat or dog or budgerigar or pet pig, whatever it might be, it is absolutely horrendous. It is also of course horrendous, though, for the people, and too often the animals are used in this way as a tool for people who wish to commit violence upon their partners to inflict harm on them through the animal, which is equally as disgusting. So it is really good to see some action in this space. I am delighted that the government is supporting this motion today, and I hope every member of this house will support this motion too.

There are many, many aspects to this, and a few of the previous speakers have also discussed housing. There are a number of reforms in this space that I think other speakers have already gone to. I do think this is a timely point to note, though, that several years ago the then Andrews, now Allan Labor government changed the renting laws to mean that you cannot be unreasonably refused for having a pet in a rental property, and I think that is a really significant thing. It is a significant thing in all cases but for this reason especially; if nothing else, for this reason it is vital, and that is why it is so good to see Victoria leading the nation on that front.

I would also like to acknowledge our local councils. It is not every day we spruik them in this chamber, but some of them do excellent work in many different areas.

Tom McIntosh interjected.

Michael GALEA: I want to acknowledge – I am not sure if you were a councillor, Mr McIntosh – the City of Casey, who have a specialised family violence and domestic pets assistance program. I believe there are other councils across Victoria that do this as well; I believe Whittlesea might be another one. But in my area at least, the City of Casey have a program where they offer support to any domestic violence victim who is having to relocate because of domestic violence. The council will actually provide safe, secure shelter for those pets for up to 14 days. I do wish to acknowledge the City of Casey for doing that, and any constituents who might be facing that situation I strongly encourage to call the council on 9705 5200 for support with that.

Obviously, domestic and family violence can stir up difficult feelings and emotions for a lot of people, and anyone who is suffering from hearing this debate today or who wishes to seek some support for themselves I would also strongly encourage to call 1800RESPECT, which is 1800 737 732.

I think this motion is really quite self-explanatory. It does what it says on the packet, and that is a very good thing that we should all be supporting. We have come a long way in acknowledging the role that animals play in our lives. Obviously we have the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986, better known as POCTA, as well as the many reforms I have briefly mentioned in the space of family and domestic violence. This is a very logical step towards supporting victims or people affected by family violence, as it is to ensuring that our pets are not used as a bargaining chip or as a weapon and most importantly of course that our beloved pets are not victimised by any person. This is a very, very important step forward in that process, so I do commend this bill. I also wish to commend Ms Purcell for bringing it forward to us today.

In closing, the importance of pets as companions really cannot be underestimated. I could not finish this contribution without making a brief note about the thing that is on everybody’s lips today, which is of course Sprite the Parliament dog. I join your calls, Acting President Terpstra, and I believe there have been a number of people speaking, a lot of journalists interested in this story today as well, which is great to see. We want to see Sprite back in the library. As Mr McIntosh says, it is a unity ticket across the chamber. It is very important for us to do that, but it is also extremely important for us to seriously support this motion today.

Georgie CROZIER (Southern Metropolitan) (10:40): I am pleased to rise to speak to motion 208 in Ms Purcell’s name, and I think she was well aware of the comments I made in the last Parliament when Mr Meddick, who she worked for, brought a similar motion into the Parliament talking about companion animals and the links to family violence. We all recognise there is evidence of a clear link between animal abuse and family violence. As has been highlighted by this motion, animal abuse occurs in up to 53 per cent of family domestic violence situations. I see that the RSPCA has quoted those figures, and they say:

Numerous studies have confirmed that in households with companion animals experiencing domestic violence and abuse, there is also a high probability of animal abuse. For example, echoing international research, a study in Victoria reported that 53% of women entering a refuge to escape domestic violence and abuse reported that their pets had been harmed.

I have been speaking about this for a long time. At the time when I was going through the child abuse inquiry, I spoke to a lot of people who were victims of child abuse, and I was aware of some very significant elements of child abuse, both institutional abuse and domestic abuse. Over that period of time I was told some horrendous stories about the clear link between how perpetrators of domestic violence do horrific things to pets to get at their partners or their children. In one particular case I was told about a father shooting the animal in front of the children – their pet dog. It was a heartbreaking story and one that really did tear at my heartstrings because I adore animals. I grew up on a farm and we had a menagerie. I think I have said that a few times in here. I had pets galore, and I am still very keen on pets. But I do think that most people who have pets just understand their value and adore them, and they are very often part of the family.

There is that concern, that cruelty to animals in family violence situations should not be tolerated, and I do not understand how anybody could do violence against a fellow human, let alone an animal. So I do feel for some of these stories that I hear. I have heard stories where people have had their pets run over. It has been said, ‘Oh, it was an accident,’ but in actual fact they were subject to family violence and trying to get out of the family violence situation. They were terrified about what might happen, and those pets were killed. Often, as we know, family violence victims do not leave, because they want to protect their pets. I think that is so, so heartbreaking. We know those stats too.

There has been some very good work in terms of animal aid shelters, and I have been out to many. I have visited those, and I want to put on record the work of one animal aid centre out in Coldstream that I visited some years ago. The former member for McEwen Fran Bailey was the chair of it. She did great work out there, and they took in a lot of animals that were subject to family violence. It was really at that time when the discussion was happening. There was clear evidence of animals that had been abused. These aid shelters took them in and they really did tremendous work, all of those working against cruelty to animals and giving shelter to these abused or abandoned pets.

If I can just go back to the issue around family violence – I am slightly deviating, but it is important that we talk about these situations – it is timely that this motion is on the record here because of the government’s announcement today about bringing in laws on strangulation. I have to say they are very slow to the party on this, because I together with the former leader back in 2018, as part of that election, put a policy that we would legislate to amend the Crimes Act 1958 to make non-fatal strangulation, choking and suffocation in a domestic setting a criminal offence. And literally the government today has lifted our policy.

A member interjected.

Georgie CROZIER: Exactly the same. So it is extraordinary that after all the hullabaloo about family violence and the royal commission it has taken this long. At the time, in 2018, when I was talking about this policy, Queensland had introduced a policy in 2016, so two years prior. There was plenty of evidence around the country and around the world why this needed to be done. The police were telling me, the police were telling the government, and yet it is 2023 – it has taken all that time for them to introduce this law. So they cannot say that they are up and running on some of this stuff. They need to really lift their game, because it was a simple piece of legislation that could have been brought in and should have been brought in. Unfortunately we did not get the opportunity, clearly, to be able to implement it, but I still say I am pleased that the government has listened to our policy and mimicked what we took to the people in 2018 on that very important issue.

But returning back to this important motion in the final few minutes that I have got, the motion goes on to talk about:

concern for the welfare of companion animals is a significant contributor to women and children remaining in violent homes …

which I have spoken about –

the property status of animals under the current legislation makes it easy for perpetrators to acquire and maintain ownership of pets for use in coercive control …

We know that domestic violence perpetrators do use that coercive control, and that is a clear sign of how so much domestic violence is perpetrated – and very seriously so too, I might add. I have spoken about the emerging research. It is clear that that is evident, and I think more needs to be done on it. The point is that I think the entire house supported the motion. I cannot remember the vote; Ms Purcell might remember.

Georgie Purcell: Passed unanimously.

Georgie CROZIER: Yes, passed unanimously in 2020. So again I say it is 2023 – a bit the same. You are talking about it now. I was talking about introducing laws and making strangulation in domestic violence a crime back in 2018, and the government is still sitting on its hands. You know, they talk the big game but on some of these important issues they do not deliver at all.

I just want to say that this is an important motion. I think there is an understanding amongst members in the house of that direct correlation between family violence, coercive controls, the abuse of animals and the cruelty to animals in certain family violence situations. Victims often find it very difficult to leave the situation because of their pets, and that also is a very heartbreaking situation. Again, I say I think this motion has got some excellent points to it, and I think the contributions have been very thoughtful and very considered and that all understand the intent of this motion.

Sonja TERPSTRA (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (10:49): I also rise to make a contribution on this motion brought by Ms Purcell in regard to family violence, and I want to thank Ms Purcell for bringing this motion. I know she is a passionate and strident advocate for all things animal and animal welfare, as am I. I am also a passionate supporter of animal welfare rights, and I want to also acknowledge and thank Ms Crozier for her thoughtful contribution in regard to this motion, because I think all of us are pretty clear on what we know about the sorts of behaviours that go along with family violence. We often see that animals are used as a bargaining chip and as coercive control to exert influence and force women to either stay or enter behaviours or do things they would not want to ordinarily do. But animals are often used as a tool to manipulate with the threat of harm to those animals.

As this motion talks about, the evidence supports and reflects that these are known facts. We know that perpetrators of family violence or people who use violence against others will use anything that a person might have an emotional connection to, and we know that our companion animals certainly fall into that category. Many of us in this place have companion animals. I know Ms Crozier talked about her menagerie that she had when she was growing up, and of course I myself also have a menagerie at home. I have had chickens – currently I do not have any chickens. But my daughter has a blue-tongue lizard. We have got a cat, and we have got a dog. I know Ms Shing has got donkeys. There are so many, many varied pets and animals that if we did a poll amongst caucus members there would be all sorts and all manner of animals. What that shows is that many of us hold our companion animals very dear to us and they hold a special place in our hearts, and it is just an absolute travesty that somebody who is seeking really to do harm to others would use something that is so dear to many of us as a tool to force behaviour and to threaten and coerce. I think the minister just read my email.

Gayle Tierney: I thought it was a media release.

Sonja TERPSTRA: No, it was not a media release, it was me campaigning to return Sprite to the Parliament. I just digress for a moment from this motion, but I am on a roll with Sprite today. This motion is actually very timely as well, given that we have had an unceremonious decision to ban poor old Sprite, the Parliament pup, from Spring Street – unceremonious, un-Australian, unilateral and unwarranted. Anyway, I will return to this motion.

It is important to acknowledge the links that family violence perpetrators use to exert control over women. I note that there are some very important statistics in this motion. They are broad, but they speak to a bigger story and an important story that is often not given the attention that it needs to be given. The motion says:

studies show women with companion animals have reported threatened or deliberate animal abuse in up to 53 per cent of FDV situations …

That is a staggering statistic and it is very concerning, and again it speaks to the individuals who seek to influence women in a coercive way. For example, if a woman seeks to leave an abusive relationship, then they may pull out all the stops, all the ways of influencing, manipulating and controlling that woman, to stop her from basically exiting that relationship. Often pets are part of that.

I know Ms Crozier talked as well in her contribution about, when she was sitting on the child abuse inquiry, the sorts of well-documented violent acts that are perpetrated on animals, and I know the RSPCA is often called in when there are concerns about animal welfare. Often when there have been violent acts committed towards animals, there is a very strong link that shows that that person is also very highly likely to behave in similar ways towards humans. It is just terrible.

Like I said earlier, I have lots of animals, and I might just share this anecdote with the chamber as well. I note Dr Heath’s contribution before about her sister and the cat – Chicago, was it?

Renee Heath: Yes.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Yes. You can see the difference that companion animals make to our lives. It is really important. So I will just give this anecdote. When I was living in Canberra many years ago – this was around the time of the Canberra bushfires – we had to get out of our house very quickly. The bushfires were coming at us, and the very first thing that I went to was: ‘Where are my animals?’ I did not really care about having shoes on my feet; I did not care about photos or any of those things. It was: ‘Where are the animals?’ Our cat ran under the bed. My husband was dutifully directed to go and find the cat from under the bed, because obviously it was very noisy and it was a bit scary. But also we had chickens at the time, and my immediate response was to grab the washing sack that we had in a basket – I was literally going to run out to the backyard, put the chickens in the washing sack and just run to the car, because it was coming at us.

But by the time I went to the back door, there were embers in the air, and I just knew that I could not get the chickens. They were free-ranging in the backyard, so it was not like they were in a pen – they were not going to get roasted, but that was a concern. My first instinct was to protect my animals, to save my animals. When we did leave the house, we had a car full of animals – dogs, cats – and babies, and all of us just got out of there. Again, my first instinct as a woman and as someone who has had companion animals my whole life was to get those animals. So I completely understand the connection that women have to animals. Especially in that situation when you are fleeing for your life, your mind goes to ‘Where are my animals?’ You can see why a perpetrator of family violence uses those emotional connections to animals to exert control. It is terrible.

The house would be well aware that we have done an enormous amount of work on family violence. The government approach to reducing family violence is enormous. The Allan Labor government is leading the nation in our commitment to addressing family violence. We have invested over $3.88 billion to prevent and respond to incidents of family violence. We have acquitted the 227 recommendations of the Royal Commission into Family Violence, and this was the first of its kind. But we know we can do more and we can continue to improve those things, and we are very happy to listen to what Ms Purcell has to say. These things do evolve, and the more we become aware of different aspects of family violence, the better we are able to respond to them as well. We have made changes to our laws to ensure landlords cannot reject a family if they have a pet, so that gives more housing options for families.

I know that I visited a family violence shelter in my region as well – I will not name where that shelter is for obvious reasons; it needs to remain secret. But one of the things that that shelter advised me of was that they also took pets into the shelter, which has also been a bit of an issue. If there is not an availability of family violence shelters to flee to for women that have pets, it can be a problem. That was a number of years ago, so there was an early acknowledgement of the role that domestic violence shelters can play for women fleeing family violence – that they need to have their animals with them. You do not want that to become a barrier to people who might be fleeing family violence. It is an important thing. Again, it is a continued effort to make sure that we continue to work on addressing the causes of family violence. It is a never-ending situation. As I said, although we have done lots of work on the family violence royal commission, we have got to continue to work on that, and we will continue to do that.

In terms of the 2021–22 budget, we did provide further funding support for victim-survivors of family violence. This included funding for refuges to access pet boarding, pet foster care rehousing programs and fitting out accommodation for the needs of pets. Not only did we have an action on making sure shelters could accommodate, but then further down the track that those accommodations could be made as well.

I have got about 30 seconds left on the clock. There is so much more that I could say on this. It is a very important motion. Again, I thank Ms Purcell for bringing it. I just want to note too that the contributions in the chamber today have been really excellent: everyone is acknowledging the important aspect that our companion animals bring to all of our lives. I will just conclude by saying that I am on Team Sprite. Let us bring Sprite back to Spring Street.

Melina BATH (Eastern Victoria) (10:59): I am pleased to rise to put my voice today to this motion 208 from Ms Purcell on the interaction between domestic pets – companion animals – and domestic violence. Unfortunately, there is a weaponisation of those domestic pets, who provide such unconditional love at a time generally when women and children are facing abuse in the home and are facing abuse in a variety of ways, whether that be physical abuse or sexual abuse or whether it be emotional and psychological abuse. We certainly see the use of coercive control by perpetrators to intimidate their spouse or a significant other – using these domestic animals, these companion pets, to hold the victim to ransom.

I would like to just provide some context. In my first year as an MP – and it sticks in my mind all these years later – there was a domestic violence case, and I will remain totally neutral on where and how. But it was one of my constituents, and indeed a psychologist felt this was a compelling and concerning case. Not only was there abuse of an animal, but there was significant physical abuse of the dear lady. She had moved away from the home, and at that home was her beloved horse. She was suffering physically and seeing a psychologist, but the great constraint that she was suffering from was how to get access to that horse and get the horse back to her new home. That really took the combined effort of Victoria Police and other agencies. But the power that these perpetrators have is so debilitating, and they understand the power that they have over their victim. It was pleasing to see that after much toing and froing – and indeed an intervention order of course – there was recognition that that horse did belong to her, and all did end well. But the scars of those interactions last a lifetime – not only the scars on the human but certainly the scars on the animals as well. So that is seared into my mind. I am not sure how effective we were, but I know we attempted to work through VicPol and other agencies to ensure that that situation was resolved.

A recent Victorian survey – and there have been many surveys quoted, so I will not go through all of them – shows that in 50 per cent of cases where there is domestic and family violence, the pet is either hurt or even killed. We know in those darkest of times, when a person is suffering so much, they turn to any light, any hope, any kindness and any level of unconditional love, and that is what these family pets and domestic animals can mean in times of huge significant stress.

One thing I know is very important, and I want to give a shout-out to Gippsland Women’s Health. Over many years they have run a significant awareness and education program. I am also aware that they have been into sporting clubs, our football and netball clubs, across Gippsland, talking about domestic violence to young people, to young sportspeople and to the gamut of people eating at the end of a football or netball training night to raise awareness about what violence looks like. What are the actual definition, the signs and the symptoms of that violence, within the people’s sphere of understanding – say, their friendship group or acquaintance group? They have done an amazing job, and all hail to them. I am sure there are many, many such organisations across the state.

One of the things that is quite interesting in looking at this motion is a 2018 report, Animal Victims of Domestic and Family Violence: Raising Youth Awareness, by the New South Wales Health Education Centre against Violence. It talks about completing pilot programs in schools, talking about violence against animals being an indicator of domestic violence and really drilling down into this with young people. In this case it was specifically in relation to boys, but I am certainly not going to put a fence around that. But that was this particular case study, which said:

Innovative programs to integrate animal abuse in the context of domestic … violence, we suggest, provide a foundation for promoting the inclusion of animals in Domestic and Family Violence …

and not only in an act but certainly in veterinarian policy, so, if you go a little bit broader, for our veterinary associations, where we have all taken our beloved pets, to have an awareness around that, and also service standards, guidelines and practices in that broad range of any animal interaction. I put these as useful findings.

I also note that in 2020 the then Liberal and National New South Wales government actually legislated for including an increase in the term of or to change the definition of ‘intimidation’ in relation to including animals in, in this case, what was called the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007. It is pleasing to see that the then prevention of domestic violence minister Mark Speakman certainly noted the importance of that protection of animals in relation to domestic violence.

If you look at our Family Violence Protection Act 2008, there is certainly a segment that could be expanded to include this. Therefore the Nationals are looking forward to seeing this motion go through the house, I would imagine unanimously, and to seeing a review. Certainly it has to fit in, there has to be that legislative background work, but it could well be that the Allan government look to New South Wales as a good template to see how that could be incorporated.

In concluding, I understand certainly from the experience of my constituent’s particular case the awful and corrupt nature of people who choose to use innocent animals to coerce behaviour. I too love animals and always give a shout-out to – I think it is still operational – the Keysborough animal shelter for providing our beloved pet. They become part of our family. Not only is it unspeakable and unthinkable to inflict domestic violence on children, on spouses, on partners et cetera, but to do that with glee on animals is absolutely untenable.

John BERGER (Southern Metropolitan) (11:08): Today I rise to speak to Ms Purcell’s motion. I want to begin by saying that I think everyone in this chamber would have a love for animals. It would make you barely human not to love animals; it is an inherent part of human nature. Earlier this year we lost our little dog Ronnie at just the tender age of two – gone too soon but not forgotten – which is why this motion should be taken seriously, and I do take this motion seriously. The motion says:

That this house notes that:

(1) companion animal abuse is a form of family and domestic violence (FDV);

(2) studies show women with companion animals have reported threatened or deliberate animal abuse in up to 53 per cent of FDV situations;

(3) concern for the welfare of companion animals is a significant contributor to women and children remaining in violent homes;

(4) the property status of animals under the current legislation makes it easy for perpetrators to acquire and maintain ownership of pets for use in coercive control;

(5) emerging research shows clear links between animal cruelty and the increased likelihood of violence against humans;

(6) in 2020 the government supported a motion to better protect companion animals and victim-survivors in situations of FDV;

and calls on the government to investigate amending the Family Violence Protection Act 2008 to include a specific offence for cruelty to animals as a form of early intervention and to further investigate the link between violence towards animals and humans in order to make appropriate reforms.

This is where the motion ends. It is a heavy motion. All humans, all people and anyone with a soul should find domestic violence to be abhorrent. It does not take being a father to make that so, but it does put it in perspective for me at least. We know that women are vastly more likely than men to be victims of domestic violence. That does not discount the men who are suffering from domestic violence, but it is just the truth. I am a son and a husband, but I am also the father of five daughters.

It is shocking and appalling that this happens, so let me unpack how this works. I did a bit of research on the topic to prepare for this. Pets can be the subject of threats of harm but can also be taken by an abusive person who is committing family violence as a means of coercive control. That means that victims can be put in an impossible position of having to choose between two impossible choices. Pets can also be harmed or killed by a current or former partner or even a family member as a way of indirect violence towards a victim who may have a restraining order or where they are unable to attack that person specifically. Post a relationship – and this is hard to say – a perpetrator may starve, abuse, neglect, threaten to harm or kill a pet when a victim-survivor flees the home, and this harm is immense. It can cause massive psychological and economic trauma to these survivors, and let us not forget the impact on children, who can be vulnerable, unable to escape and forced to witness and sometimes even participate in these acts of animal cruelty. One study of self-selecting victim-survivors who owned a pet at the time of family violence notes that there were behavioural changes 85 per cent of the time with their pets, and much of the time these people who reported the changes noted that the changes were not small but significant and long term, with symptoms including fear of men and anxiety. We know that this can lead to lifelong issues for pets.

Animal welfare remains a priority for the Allan Labor government. I think it is fair to say that Victoria has some of the most progressive and modern approaches in this space. We know, like with other forms of coercive control, it can be difficult to identify. Normally perpetrated behind closed doors, the use of pets to continue this cycle obviously can occur more subtly. Take the example of using financial abuse to control a victim-survivor. Perpetrators can withhold money when they need to take a sick pet to a vet or buy them food. This leads to a cycle of dependency and makes it increasingly hard to escape. There is no better evidence than when victims are reluctant to report family violence and believe that delaying fleeing a violent situation is best out of concern for their pet and their wellbeing. I believe this has been noted in today’s debate already, but it needs to be re-emphasised. One study found 35 per cent of women delayed seeking refuge for this very reason, and many refuges for crisis accommodation in Victoria report being unable to house pets, making this even harder.

Research shows that those who harm pets are more likely to be a family violence offender. On top of that they are more likely to offend in general. It is part of the homicidal triad. Research shows harm to pets occurs more frequently where violence is also perpetrated against survivors. One study found that perpetrators who harm pets in a family violence context are five times more likely to abuse their partners and more likely to use stalking and emotional, physical or sexual violence. Each of these is truly evil. No-one should ever see their pets go through this, and it is important that we consider the reality of these risks in the context of family violence. This is not rare. The link is real. We have also seen contributions across the chamber today note this.

The Sentencing Advisory Council referred to studies in their 2019 report Animal Cruelty Offences in Victoria, noting:

… studies of pet-owning women seeking services from domestic violence shelters have found that between 47% and 71% of the respondents’ male partners had threatened, harmed or killed their pet.

This has been intense, and I thank Ms Purcell for raising it. It has been important. I note Ms Purcell is taking on a great tradition set by her former boss Mr Meddick in advocating in this space, and I am proud of the work we have done in this space. In the 2022–23 budget we delivered a record $18.6 million package to support animal care and protection. Since being elected in 2014 the Andrews and now Allan Labor government has invested $8.2 million in shelters and in carers at animal welfare organisations to improve the welfare of Victorian pets. We have got plenty of reforms to be proud of. These include banning cruel puppy farms, the strictest breeding rules in the country, making it an offence to sell a pet without a valid microchip and a source number from the pet exchange register, removing the need for greyhounds to be muzzled in public and Victoria’s first Animal Welfare Action Plan, which recognises that animals are sentient – something I am sure Peter Singer would appreciate.

Under the Allan Labor government our reforms for pets are nation leading. No longer must Victorians choose between pets that they love and a place to live, thanks to the Andrews Labor government’s and now Allan Labor government’s historic laws providing renters the right to keep a pet. We know for those who are fleeing violence it can often be hard to find a house. Why should it be made a bit harder by having to worry about keeping a pet? This is good reform indeed. We have provided additional funding to the RSPCA Victoria inspectorate to improve compliance and enforcement and to establish Animal Welfare Victoria, which brings together all aspects of animal welfare in its own dedicated agency. We have reformed the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee to ensure government receives expert advice. This is on top of introducing mandatory reporting of animal fate data for dogs and cats in shelters and pounds. We were the first state to do this, after all.

I speak about housing a lot in this place, and for good reason. It is important to reflect on our progress in this space when it comes to housing survivors. There is always the work that has to be done, but I am proud to be a member of the Allan Labor government, which is not afraid of talking about these tough tasks. The 2022–23 budget last year invested $69.1 million over four years to fund existing family violence refuges, to build and staff two new refuges and upgrade three existing partner agencies’ operating facilities and to purchase six new crisis accommodation properties. This year’s budget has committed to delivering $40.4 million for a range of targeted housing and support to transform and meet critical demand, including women-specific services and of course the vitally important congregate housing facilities, of which we are delivering four. We also acquired 325 social housing dwellings, prioritised family violence victim-survivors and their families for social housing through the Victorian Housing Register, redeveloped 17 Homes Victoria owned family violence refuges to the core and cluster model, constructed three Aboriginal family violence refuges, provided over 6500 flexible support packages each year to help victim-survivors and supported over 1800 people with private rental assistance.

There is always more to do, and we will always continue to work on building our reforms where we can. That includes modernising our family welfare regulatory framework, delivering the first ever pet census and progressing reforms to the rehoming of pets.

I would also like to put forward my support for Sprite coming back to the parliamentary precinct, where he belongs.

Ann-Marie HERMANS (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (11:18): In my 48 seconds I would like to thank Georgie for moving this motion. I live in the City of Casey, and have done for about 20 years, where I have raised my family. It is reported to have the highest domestic violence incidence in Victoria. The Wayss manager in Dandenong, where my office is, also mentioned that there has been an increase in terms of spending for women and children in Dandenong, Cardinia and Casey. I think in terms of animals, the cruelty that people have had to undergo in losing their animals, not being able to take them with them, or seeing them suffer from their own abuser and staying there because either they cannot take their animals with them or it is easier to stay and suffer in that situation than to find themselves homeless and unable to take everything that is dear to them is a real issue. So I want to say thank you and commend this motion to the house.

Georgie PURCELL (Northern Victoria) (11:19): I want to start by thanking everyone for their very valuable contributions here today. Often as politicians we get a bad rap, and often I think it is understandable, but I really think the best is on display when we are all in this place in agreement and working together on a very, very important issue that will not just transform and save the lives of animals but have the real potential to save the lives of women and children and people experiencing family violence as well, and that is so deeply important.

The next thing that I would say is that while I thank the government for their indication and their commitment today that they will work with me and other members of this place towards this outcome, we must do it quickly, because we know that with every single day that goes by where this issue is not addressed there are people in this state experiencing violence and there are pets in this state experiencing violence, and we have the opportunity here with our collective power to end that and to change that. Not only will this form of early intervention be saving animal lives, it will be saving the lives of those people experiencing violence or even stopping it from happening in the first place, which would always be our goal – to eradicate family violence in this state, whether that be to humans or to animals.

Once we have finished this work and can legislate an animal cruelty offence or a recognition of animals in our Family Violence Protection Act 2008, I just want to remind the government that there is more work to be done. One of the biggest issues facing people experiencing violence in this state has a simple solution, and that issue is the registration of animals to perpetrators, which stops people from being able to take their pets because they can be charged with theft if they do so, even if that animal is being harmed, even if there is violence to that animal in the home, because our animal cruelty laws are not strong enough. This leads me to my next point: that a very important part of this work will be delivering on our commitment for a brand new animal care and protection act which will replace the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986, which I know many of us have been eagerly waiting to see over the past few years. I hope that it is delivered soon.

I want to thank all members here today in this place for sharing their stories and for being vulnerable. I know that it is often not easy to share many of the stories that we did today, but it is so important to help us understand why this reform is so necessary. But most of all I want to thank the countless women and their families that reached out to me when I announced that I was bringing this for debate but also, formerly, many of the women that I spoke to when I was working for Andy Meddick, when he was the Animal Justice Party MP in this place, and that we have been able to reconnect with and update on the work that we are picking up now. They are deeply grateful and very excited, and they hope that we can act on this very quickly.

I want to acknowledge every woman, every child and every animal that has been lost as a victim. There are lives that we have not been able to save prior to this, but we can commit to making sure that it does not happen to anyone else again. So to all victim-survivors and the families of people who have been lost to family violence, I just want to acknowledge that this can be a very difficult and hard debate to have but a very, very important one and one that I am always so thankful that we can be united on. I will leave it there. Thank you very much, everyone, for your contributions.

Motion agreed to.