PROPOSED changes to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986 (POCTA) are causing concern amongst agricultural industry stakeholders as the detail within the new Plan for Victoria’s New Animal Care and Protection Laws, (the plan) remains ambiguous and unclear.

Agriculture minister, Gayle Tierney, is responsible for the proposed legislation and said while having served Victoria well for over 30 years, the POCTA Act is now outdated and no longer fit for purpose.

For the first time under Victorian animal welfare law, animals would be recognised as sentient and capable of feelings and perceiving between positive and negative experiences; what the proposed changes would mean for farmers isn’t clear.

In addition, given the current POCTA Act does not enforce care requirements for animals, under the new legislation, care requirements for animals would be set in Victorian law for the first time and would be enforceable.

At this stage a review of the public’s feedback is currently underway and will be used to draft legislation before being introduced to the Victorian Parliament for further debate.

The plan states the main aim of introducing new laws would be to help protect animals from cruelty while lawful activities such as hunting, fishing, farming, racing and pest control would be able to continue.

The proposed laws would institute a base offence of general cruelty, such as wounding an animal or failing to provide necessary veterinary attention.

A general cruelty offence would be a strict liability offence and carry fines of up to $45,453 or imprisonment of up to one year for a person, or for a body corporate, up to $227,175.

However, of concern is that a general cruelty offence could be prosecuted without the need to prove the accused intended any wrongdoing.

One local farmer said there were too many gaps in the proposed laws and the “descriptions of industry specifics and their respective penalties are too broad and vague for a complex industry like livestock transport and livestock handling”.

“There are too many variables in the day to day dealings of livestock animals that require a vast understanding of animal welfare and livestock management,” they said.

They also expressed grave concerns that the changes are an attempt at a power grab by the Victorian Government to control farming.

In particular, a paragraph on page 34 of the proposal, that states “unreasonable harm, pain or distress of the animals would not need to occur before authorities could intervene”.

Victorian Farmer’s Federal (VFF) vice president, Danyel Cucinotta said the VFF would continue to work with decision makers to ensure that a “farmer’s right to farm was protected and unburdened by onerous, prescriptive legislation”.

“Farmers are understandably cautious about what the proposed Animal Care and Protection Laws mean for routine husbandry procedures which are necessary for animal health and welfare,” he said.

Shadow agriculture minister, Peter Walsh didn’t comment on the specific details of the changes proposed but said that the Liberals and Nationals would consult widely and debate any legislation that may be presented to the Parliament, after the November 26 state election.

 “We are committed to the ongoing review of the POCTA (Act 1986) and to the development of new, more contemporary legislation,” he said.

 Mr Walsh said employing the world’s best practice in respect to animal welfare to achieve strong animal welfare outcomes for all native, domestic and productive animals was a priority for the Liberals and Nationals.