by Sue Skelsey, CPG volunteer
The brutal abuse of thousands of Australian greyhounds is not a serious enough matter for the Australian government to worry about.
This is the clear message conveyed by the Senate Committee’s rejection last month of Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi’s proposed Customs Legislation Amendment (Commercial Greyhound Export and Import Prohibition) Bill 2021.
The Bill aimed to amend customs laws to prohibit the exportation and importation of greyhounds for breeding, racing or any other commercial purpose. It included a ban on the export or import of greyhound reproductive material.
Passport system is a "complete failure
Senator Faruqi presented this Bill following evidence that current laws are not protecting greyhounds from being exported and cruelly exploited in countries overseas that have little or no animal welfare protection
This is “partly driven by loopholes in state greyhound regulations, and limited oversight from the federal government”. A greyhound deemed to be a companion animal can be sent to any overseas country as a pet, without the need to be neutered or acquire a Greyhound Passport from Greyhounds Australasia.
Even with a passport, a greyhound can be sent anywhere overseas, as long as it travels via a country that is deemed acceptable. There is no control over the ultimate destination of any dog once it leaves Australian jurisdiction.
There is also evidence that some owners and trainers simply by-pass regulations altogether. They are able to do so because it is not illegal to export greyhounds from Australia.
According to Senator Faruqi, Greyhound Australasia’s passport system is a “complete failure with the industry’s own admission that hundreds of dogs have been exported illegally.”
Status quo and a gruesome future for many greyhounds
It is quite astounding that this proposed Bill was rejected by the Senate considering there was overwhelming support for it from members of the public and others, including experts in animal welfare and at least three politicians. Only a small number of submissions opposed the Bill.
What remains now is status quo and a gruesome future for many greyhounds. Evidence to the Senate Committee and from other sources reveals that greyhounds sent overseas are kept in appalling conditions, sent to meat markets when they are no longer useful or subjected to excruciatingly painful deaths eg. injections with insecticide.
"A disproportionate response to welfare concerns"
The racing industry’s main objections seemed to be that the Bill was “a disproportionate response to welfare concerns”, would jeopardise their international trade relations and would disrupt the racing industry.
The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry together with the Department of Home Affairs rejected the Bill on technicalities. Among other points they argued that a law for greyhounds does not belong under Customs Regulations because strictly speaking “greyhounds do not pose a safety risk to the Australian community” and the Australian Border Force have more serious issues to contend with. The department also said – “the Border Force does not possess the appropriate expertise nor resources” required to administer the Bill”.
The Committee's reasons for rejecting the Bill
The Committee gave three reasons for rejecting the bill.
It said that “a number of existing mechanisms…in place across Australia…play a role in monitoring and regulating the export of greyhounds.” Furthermore, “Greyhounds Australasia, industry bodies, and the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry maintain avenues of communication…and demonstrate a commitment to the continued regulation of the industry”. The final comment was – “enactment of the provisions in this bill would place administrative obligations on government departments that are not equipped with the expertise or resources to meet the objectives of the bill.”
Vested interests, of course, were never mentioned as a factor in their decision. In other words it seems that greyhound carnage is justifiable if it saves inconvenience to government departments, protects the financial interests of a small group of the racing fraternity and also safeguards the government’s own revenue from gambling. In the words of Senator Faruqi “Vested racing and gambling interests have trumped animal welfare yet again, with both major parties endorsing the cruel and inhumane fate awaiting greyhounds exported overseas.”
Although reprehensible, it is not surprising that the two major political parties have united in rejecting this Bill. In the past, they have both overlooked a plethora of damning evidence including abuse of greyhounds, over-breeding, injuries, unnecessary euthanasias – and permitted greyhound racing to continue in most parts of Australia. They have also ignored the growing tide of public disapproval for greyhound racing, as well as the devastating, sometimes fatal consequences of gambling on many people’s lives.