❓ A WA parliamentary question seeks details on animal cruelty charges against Westpork, including specific charges, court findings, and evidence. The Minister provides some details but declines to table court records or evidence, citing court procedures and warrant restrictions.
AnsweredQoN 274Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
In reference to the Department of Agriculture and Food’s media statement on 9 April 2013, entitlted
Western Australian Piggery Fined For Animal Welfare Breaches
, which discusses a ruling that has set a record for animal cruelty fines in Australia:
(a) what specific cruelty charges did Westpork plead guilty to;
(b) will the Minister table in Parliament the Statement of Material Facts presented to the Magistrate to ensure the circumstances are placed on the public record, if not, why not;
(c) I ask that the Minister confirm whether the Magistrate found that:
(i) the 10 charges were representative charges;
(ii) that the pigs suffered unnecessarily for weeks before being euthanised following inspection;
(iii) that the pigs were in acute and obvious pain and were displaying extreme distress;
(iv) that the system in place at the piggery to prevent this type of cruelty was ignored; and
(v) that the decision to continue treatment after the point that the pigs could have recovered was a commercial one;
(d) given the public interest and that of other piggeries in the industry in understanding the precedence of Westpork case on establishing what is deemed to be animal cruelty under the Animal Welfare Act 2002, will the Minister table in Parliament any evidence, including photos and video images, of the 10 pigs before and after death and any post-mortem reports, if not, why not; and
(e) what other charges have been brought against Westpork since 2006?
Western Australian Piggery Fined For Animal Welfare Breaches
, which discusses a ruling that has set a record for animal cruelty fines in Australia:
(a) what specific cruelty charges did Westpork plead guilty to;
(b) will the Minister table in Parliament the Statement of Material Facts presented to the Magistrate to ensure the circumstances are placed on the public record, if not, why not;
(c) I ask that the Minister confirm whether the Magistrate found that:
(i) the 10 charges were representative charges;
(ii) that the pigs suffered unnecessarily for weeks before being euthanised following inspection;
(iii) that the pigs were in acute and obvious pain and were displaying extreme distress;
(iv) that the system in place at the piggery to prevent this type of cruelty was ignored; and
(v) that the decision to continue treatment after the point that the pigs could have recovered was a commercial one;
(d) given the public interest and that of other piggeries in the industry in understanding the precedence of Westpork case on establishing what is deemed to be animal cruelty under the Animal Welfare Act 2002, will the Minister table in Parliament any evidence, including photos and video images, of the 10 pigs before and after death and any post-mortem reports, if not, why not; and
(e) what other charges have been brought against Westpork since 2006?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
18 June 2013
Responded by
Minister representing the Minister for Agriculture and Food
Response time
26 days
(a) Westpork pled guilty to ten charges of breaching section 19(1) and
19(3)(h) of the Animal Welfare Act 2002 . The offences occurred
between 20 January and 23 January 2009 (two offences), between 22 January and
25 January 2009 (2 offences) and between 26 January and 2 February 2009 (6
offences).
(b)-(d) If the Member wishes to access the Court records concerning these
prosecutions, then it is for the Member to seek access to those Court records
through the proper Court procedures. As to other evidence collected in support
of the prosecution, that evidence was obtained pursuant to a warrant and should
not be disclosed other than in pursuit of the charges in question. I see
no basis upon which to now disclose that information to Parliament.
(e) The following charges have been brought against Westpork since
2006:
one count of being cruel to an animal, contrary to section 19(1) and (3)(h)
of the Animal Welfare Act 2002 (date of offence 25 January 2007); and four
counts of being cruel to an animal, contrary to section 19(1) and (3)(h) of the
Animal Welfare Act 2002 (date of offence between 15 April and 22 April 2009).
These charges were discontinued.
19(3)(h) of the Animal Welfare Act 2002 . The offences occurred
between 20 January and 23 January 2009 (two offences), between 22 January and
25 January 2009 (2 offences) and between 26 January and 2 February 2009 (6
offences).
(b)-(d) If the Member wishes to access the Court records concerning these
prosecutions, then it is for the Member to seek access to those Court records
through the proper Court procedures. As to other evidence collected in support
of the prosecution, that evidence was obtained pursuant to a warrant and should
not be disclosed other than in pursuit of the charges in question. I see
no basis upon which to now disclose that information to Parliament.
(e) The following charges have been brought against Westpork since
2006:
one count of being cruel to an animal, contrary to section 19(1) and (3)(h)
of the Animal Welfare Act 2002 (date of offence 25 January 2007); and four
counts of being cruel to an animal, contrary to section 19(1) and (3)(h) of the
Animal Welfare Act 2002 (date of offence between 15 April and 22 April 2009).
These charges were discontinued.
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.