❓ A parliamentary question regarding allegations of animal welfare breaches by Emanuel Export Pty Ltd, potential conflicts between state and commonwealth law, and the handling of a subsequent appeal. The answer reveals the company was acquitted and refers to a previous question for further details.
AnsweredQoN 3382Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(a) what were the allegations made about Emanuel Export Pty Ltd;
(b) what was the finding made by Magistrate Crawford;
(c) is it true that the magistrate found the defendants guilty but imposed no penalty; and
(i) if so, why not;
(d) was there a technical issue regarding this case that involves some conflict between State and Commonwealth law and, if so, what was that conflict;
(e) did the Solicitor General or any other State Government officer recommend an appeal be lodged against this decision;
(f) if so, who made those recommendations and why;
(g) was an appeal lodged;
(h) was the appeal subsequently heard or withdrawn and, if so, why and on whose instructions;
(i) did the Minister for Local Government give any instructions regarding the appeal and, if so, under which section of which Act was this done;
(j) did the Minister for Local Government make any recommendation to withdraw the appeal and, if so, what were the reasons for this recommendation;
(k) if the answer to (i) or (j) is yes, did the Director General for the Department of Local Government agree with any instruction given or recommendation made by the Minister for Local Government with respect to this appeal and, if not, why not; and
(l) what further action will the Government now take regarding this matter?
(b) what was the finding made by Magistrate Crawford;
(c) is it true that the magistrate found the defendants guilty but imposed no penalty; and
(i) if so, why not;
(d) was there a technical issue regarding this case that involves some conflict between State and Commonwealth law and, if so, what was that conflict;
(e) did the Solicitor General or any other State Government officer recommend an appeal be lodged against this decision;
(f) if so, who made those recommendations and why;
(g) was an appeal lodged;
(h) was the appeal subsequently heard or withdrawn and, if so, why and on whose instructions;
(i) did the Minister for Local Government give any instructions regarding the appeal and, if so, under which section of which Act was this done;
(j) did the Minister for Local Government make any recommendation to withdraw the appeal and, if so, what were the reasons for this recommendation;
(k) if the answer to (i) or (j) is yes, did the Director General for the Department of Local Government agree with any instruction given or recommendation made by the Minister for Local Government with respect to this appeal and, if not, why not; and
(l) what further action will the Government now take regarding this matter?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
1 August 2008
Responded by
Minister representing the Minister for Local Government
Response time
52 days
(a) That the company breached sections 19(1) and (3) of the
Animal Welfare Act 2002
in respect to the manner in which sheep were transported, confined and fed.
(b) The accused were acquitted of all charges.
(c) No.
(i) Not applicable.
(d) The Magistrate found there was an operational inconsistency between the
Animal Welfare Act 2002
and Commonwealth law due to the time of the year that the export license and permit issued by the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service allowed the sheep to be transported.
(e) - (l) Please refer to my answer to Question Without Notice 207.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
Animal Welfare Act 2002
in respect to the manner in which sheep were transported, confined and fed.
(b) The accused were acquitted of all charges.
(c) No.
(i) Not applicable.
(d) The Magistrate found there was an operational inconsistency between the
Animal Welfare Act 2002
and Commonwealth law due to the time of the year that the export license and permit issued by the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service allowed the sheep to be transported.
(e) - (l) Please refer to my answer to Question Without Notice 207.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.