Agriculture and Fisheries and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2023
Plain English Summary
Overview
This bill makes sweeping changes across agriculture, fisheries, biosecurity and animal management in Queensland. It bans dangerous dog breeds and introduces statewide dog control laws with tough new penalties, establishes mandatory onboard monitoring for commercial fishing vessels to protect the Great Barrier Reef, strengthens biosecurity emergency response powers, and modernises several other agricultural regulatory frameworks.
Who it affects
Dog owners face new statewide control requirements and significantly higher penalties for dog attacks. Commercial fishers must accommodate cameras or observers on their vessels. Farmers benefit from improved biosecurity emergency responses and a less confrontational debt mediation process.
Dangerous dog law reform
Bans five restricted dog breeds in Queensland (pit bull terriers, Dogo Argentino, Fila Brasileiro, Japanese Tosa, Presa Canario), with existing permitted dogs grandfathered. Introduces a statewide requirement for all dogs to be under effective control in public places. Dramatically increases penalties for dog attacks, including up to 3 years imprisonment for the most serious cases.
- Five dangerous dog breeds banned in Queensland — existing permitted dogs grandfathered for life
- New statewide law requiring all dogs to be under effective control in public places, with penalties up to 600 penalty units or 2 years jail if a dog attacks and causes death or grievous bodily harm
- Encouraging a dog to attack that causes death or grievous bodily harm now carries up to 700 penalty units or 3 years imprisonment
- Destruction orders are now mandatory where a regulated dog seriously attacks a person or animal
- QCAT appeals on destruction orders limited to questions of law only
Fisheries monitoring and enforcement
Introduces mandatory onboard cameras and observers for high-risk commercial fisheries to independently validate catch data and protect threatened species, particularly in the Great Barrier Reef. Also strengthens enforcement powers, makes interfering with fishing apparatus a serious offence, and introduces automatic licence suspension for unpaid fees.
- Mandatory cameras or onboard observers on commercial fishing vessels in high-risk fisheries, backed by $22 million in state funding plus $22 million from the Commonwealth
- Interfering with another fisher's equipment now a serious fisheries offence — can result in licence cancellation
- Fishing authority automatically suspended if annual fee not paid by the due date
- Chief executive can impose conditions on fishers who repeatedly interact with protected animals
- New aquaculture authority created for more responsive management of aquaculture operations
Biosecurity improvements
Strengthens emergency response powers by extending the maximum duration of biosecurity emergency orders from 21 to 42 days and inspector emergency powers from 96 to 168 hours. Allows local councils to manage locally significant pests under state biosecurity law instead of separate local laws.
- Biosecurity emergency orders can now last up to 42 days (was 21 days), with mandatory revocation once the risk has passed
- Inspector emergency powers extended from 96 hours to up to 168 hours with chief executive approval
- Local governments can now manage locally significant pests under the Biosecurity Act instead of separate local laws
- Prohibited and restricted matter lists transferred from the Act to the Regulation for easier updating
Farm debt mediation and other reforms
Renames 'enforcement action notices' to 'notices inviting a request for mediation' to make the farm debt process less intimidating. Also enables information sharing for industrial cannabis regulation, fixes an animal welfare loophole, and updates outdated language about First Nations peoples.
- Farm debt notices renamed from 'enforcement action notice' to 'notice inviting a request for mediation'
- Industrial cannabis growers benefit from expanded testing authorisations and better information sharing with police
- Businesses can now be held liable for employees' animal welfare breaches under the Animal Care and Protection Act
- Outdated and offensive references to First Nations peoples updated across nature conservation and fisheries legislation
Bill Story
The journey of this bill through Parliament, including debate and recorded votes.
▸Committee16 Nov 2023View Hansard
Referred to State Development and Regional Industries Committee
The Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee (which took over from the former State Development and Regional Industries Committee after a parliamentary restructure) examined the bill and recommended it be passed. The committee made five recommendations covering dog breed identification guidelines, mandatory destruction orders for dogs that seriously attack people, privacy safeguards for fisheries monitoring data, and aquaculture authority timeframes. The Queensland Government supported four of the five recommendations, declining only the suggestion to mandate destruction orders for non-regulated dogs that seriously attack a person, citing concerns about removing officer discretion in cases involving provocation or mitigating circumstances.
Key findings (5)
- Over 8,500 complaints about aggressive dogs and dog attacks are received annually by local governments across Queensland, with approximately 2,500 victims requiring hospitalisation, 81 per cent of whom are children.
- The committee found that breed identification guidelines were needed to support local governments in implementing the proposed state-wide ban on restricted dog breeds.
- The committee identified privacy concerns around information collected through Independent Onboard Monitoring of commercial fishing vessels and recommended the preparation of an information privacy plan.
- The committee considered the rights of victims in serious dog attacks to be underdeveloped and suggested mandatory destruction orders for non-regulated dogs that seriously attack a person, though the government did not support this.
- The committee was satisfied that the penalties proposed in the bill were relevant, proportionate and consistent with the rights and liberties of individuals.
Recommendations (5)
- The committee recommends the Agriculture and Fisheries and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2023 be passed.
- The committee recommends that the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries develop guidelines on breed identification, in consultation with the Animal Management Taskforce, to support the local government sector.
- The committee suggests that the Government amend new section 127A in clause 67 to provide that if a non-regulated dog has seriously attacked a person, the authorised person must make a destruction order in relation to the dog.
- The committee recommends that the Government consider introducing into regulation measures that safeguard the privacy of information collected through Independent Onboard Monitoring, including the preparation and publication of an information privacy plan.
- The committee recommends that the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries consider the timeframes associated with aquaculture authorities, specifically whether a period of more than 12 months may be more appropriate.
Committee report tabled
▸Second Reading18 Apr 2024View Hansard
▸14 members spoke8 support2 oppose4 mixed
As minister, moved the second reading and spoke in reply defending the bill's reforms to dangerous dog laws, fisheries management, and biosecurity. Emphasised community safety, sustainable fisheries, and meeting national and international commitments.
“The reforms will protect community safety, increase consistency in dog laws across Queensland and provide a deterrent to dog owners by ensuring penalties for doing the wrong thing are commensurate with the harm done.”— 2024-04-18View Hansard
Generally supported the bill's policy intent but raised significant concerns about breed-specific dog bans being unenforceable due to unreliable identification methods, and criticised the government's consultation with commercial fishers on independent onboard monitoring.
“While I support the majority of measures in this bill, I urge the minister to further consider breed-specific bans on certain dogs, destruction orders, issues around the rollout of IOM and the time frame for aquaculture changes.”— 2024-04-18View Hansard
As committee chair, supported the bill's tough measures around dangerous dogs and independent onboard monitoring for fishing vessels, noting the importance of managing fisheries for future generations.
“It is clear that this law will improve community safety because it will introduce tough measures around dangerous dogs.”— 2024-04-18View Hansard
Supported the bill but raised concerns about breed-specific bans being operationally challenging to enforce, citing Victoria's experience where 74 per cent of appeals were overturned. Also raised concerns about lack of meaningful consultation with commercial fishers on onboard monitoring.
“I am happy to support the bill.”— 2024-04-18View Hansard
Supported the bill, particularly the effective control measures for dogs in public spaces and the committee's recommendation to safeguard privacy of information collected through onboard monitoring.
“If we are to put cameras on board vessels to monitor the catch, it is important that we protect the privacy information of those on deck.”— 2024-04-18View Hansard
Strongly opposed the bill, arguing its fisheries amendments enshrine the destruction of the commercial fishing industry in North Queensland, driven by UNESCO commitments rather than scientific evidence. Warned the changes would devastate livelihoods in remote communities like Karumba and Weipa.
“I want it to be known that we will stand against this, because we stand for those industries that you are trying to kill with this bill.”— 2024-04-18View Hansard
Supported the bill's reforms to dangerous dog laws, sharing a constituent's story of a child seriously attacked by a dangerous dog. Welcomed the tougher penalties and breed-specific bans as key community safety measures.
“Community safety is a key priority of the Miles government, and these legislative changes are a key part of keeping Queenslanders safe by preventing and reducing dangerous dog attacks.”— 2024-04-18View Hansard
Supported limiting QCAT appeals and tougher penalties but raised concerns about breed identification challenges, the cost of DNA testing for councils, and the need for further reforms around dog attacks on private property.
“It is critically important that there is consistency from federal, state and local governments when it comes to bans and the operation of the restrictions.”— 2024-04-18View Hansard
Supported the bill's dangerous dog reforms, emphasising community safety as the priority. Welcomed the statewide consistency of dog laws, increased penalties for repeat offenders, and the accompanying community education campaign.
“This bill is not about dividing dog owners; it is about bringing people together and making sure we all do the right thing as responsible pet owners.”— 2024-04-18View Hansard
Opposed the bill, particularly the fisheries amendments requiring onboard camera monitoring, which he described as an offensive, disproportionate invasion of privacy. Also objected to the removal of consent requirements for biosecurity officers entering premises and the broad ministerial powers over fishing authorities.
“Camera surveillance is an extremely offensive intervention that is completely out of proportion to the problems being addressed. It is unnecessary and violates the privacy of fishermen.”— 2024-04-18View Hansard
Supported the bill, drawing on his experience as a former paramedic attending dog attacks to back stronger regulation. Also supported the independent onboard monitoring framework for fisheries to protect the Great Barrier Reef and meet UNESCO commitments.
“I call for more regulation and control and I applaud the minister for this particular piece of legislation. It will make the community safer, Minister, and thank you for your work.”— 2024-04-18View Hansard
Criticised the government's handling of biosecurity, fisheries management, and consultation with industry. Argued the onboard monitoring sets a dangerous precedent and that breed-specific dog bans are ineffective, but did not explicitly oppose the bill.
“To the few fishermen who are left: thank you for what you do. The LNP will always have your back. It is clear that the Labor government is more interested in strangling you in red tape and strangling you out of existence.”— 2024-04-18View Hansard
Supported the bill's dangerous dog reforms and highlighted the government's broader biosecurity investments including $60 million for biofencing. Drew on personal experience of being attacked by a dog as a child.
“I am proud to be part of a government that is certainly prioritising community safety, and this is an important part of that.”— 2024-04-18View Hansard
Raised concerns from kennel clubs and dog breed organisations that certain breeds are being falsely demonised by the bill's breed-specific bans. Her speech was cut short by the guillotine before she could fully state her position.
“Their collective motivation for their submission is a recognition that it is a privilege to own our companion animals and that too often certain breeds can be falsely demonised.”— 2024-04-18View Hansard
▸In Detail18 Apr 2024View Hansard
Minister's amendments Nos 1 to 11: deferred commencement of dangerous dog offence provisions from 1 May 2024 to 31 July 2024 to allow public education; clarified references to 'attack' in penalty provisions for effective control offences; ensured biosecurity prohibited matter listing criteria accommodate existing listings when moved to regulation; and corrected the definition of 'exclusion zone' to use 'equipment' instead of 'apparatus'.
Referenced Entities
Legislation
Organisations
Programs & Schemes
Sectors Affected
Classified using AGIFT/ANZSIC Australian government standards