[Jack Malarkey]

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/st...finement-part-of-act-animal-welfare-overhaul/

Re Bill before Legislative Assembly:

Canberra Times article extract:

MAY 14 2019 - 8:36PM

Do let the dogs out: Huge fines for pet confinement part of ACT animal welfare overhaul

Peter Brewer

ACT Politics

...

Guide dogs, hearing dogs or service dogs will be provided unfettered access to public spaces and buildings including churches, restaurants, clubs and public passenger vehicles such as buses, taxis and Ubers.

Anyone who denies legitimate access to a person and their registered assistance dog, or adds a fee or charge for the dog's use or access, will face a fine of up to $4000.

A hard line is also taken with anyone who pretends their dog is a registered assistance dog. Faking it will attract a $3200 fine.

...

 

[RoboRider]

If it is a 'registered' assistance animal you would hope they have to provide proof of said registration if requested ... that is the requirement for Victorian public transport vehicles

 

[Jack Malarkey]

If it is a 'registered' assistance animal you would hope they have to provide proof of said registration if requested ... that is the requirement for Victorian public transport vehicles

I haven't had a chance to check the Bill itself yet but I do know it proposes an accreditation and registration system for assistance animals.

When I do check the Bill itself, I'll check for the matter you have raised and will report back here.

See also https://uberpeople.net/threads/new-legislative-framework-for-assistance-animals-in-act.299820/.

 

[Jack Malarkey]

1. I have now had an opportunity to have a look at the Bill currently before the ACT Legislative Assembly.

2. The name of the Bill is the Animal Welfare Legislation Amendment Bill 2019: see

https://www.legislation.act.gov.au/DownloadFile/b/db_60107/current/DOCX/db_60107.DOCX

3. Part 5 of the Bill concerns assistance animals.

4. There is an offence relating to refusing access to an assistance animal to a public place. The Bill gives examples of a 'public place' including a 'public passenger vehicle'.

5. In the ACT, a public passenger vehicle includes a rideshare vehicle.

6. The relevant penalty is up to 50 penalty units. A 'penalty unit' in the ACT is currently $150 for an individual. This means that the penalty for refusing access is up to $7,500.

7. The accreditation procedures for assistance animals would result in the accredited animal being allocated a registration number and a registration certificate.

8. There is proposed to be a penalty of up to 20 penalty units ($3,000) for falsely claiming an animal is an assistance animal. The proposed legislation cites 'wearing assistance animal identification' as an example of a potential false claim.

9. I note that there is no express entitlement for a driver or other relevant persons to require the production of the registration certificate as a condition of providing access.

10. This may be potentially problematic in cases where the driver reasonably believes the animal may not be an assistance animal and refuses access because the passenger cannot or will not produce the registration certificate but it ends up that the animal concerned is in fact an assistance animal.

11. The proposed legislation does provide that the person concerned (the driver in this case) doesn't commit an offence if he or she 'has a reasonable excuse'.

12. Neither the proposed legislation nor the accompanying explanatory statement (see https://www.legislation.act.gov.au/DownloadFile/es/db_60140/current/DOCX/db_60140.DOCX) gives any examples of what a reasonable excuse is.

13. I don't know whether in the scenario I have outlined the driver would have a reasonable excuse but they may have. That might ultimately need to be decided by a court.

14. It would be desirable for this aspect of the proposed legislation to be clarified so that a driver acting in good faith is not potentially unfairly penalised.

 

[142605]

If it is a 'registered' assistance animal you would
hope they have to provide proof of said registration if requested ... that is the requirement for Victorian public transport vehicles

There is no such thng as a "registered' assistance animal" because the law requires no registration.

 

[Jack Malarkey]

There is no such thng as a "registered' assistance animal" because the law requires no registration.

This proposed legislation contemplates a registration system.

 

[142605]

Won't happen. Disabled lobby is too powerful.

 

[Who is John Galt?]

How would you go taking a doberman into a mosque?

 

[Bubsie]

The registration certificate should have an individual QR code that can be scanned by the Uber app to validate that it's legit and not just printed from a Google search.

And the penalty for fake claims should be the same as the penalty for refusing a legit dog.

 

[Unleaded]

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/st...finement-part-of-act-animal-welfare-overhaul/

Re Bill before Legislative Assembly:

Canberra Times article extract:

MAY 14 2019 - 8:36PM

Do let the dogs out: Huge fines for pet confinement part of ACT animal welfare overhaul

Peter Brewer

ACT Politics

...

Guide dogs, hearing dogs or service dogs will be provided unfettered access to public spaces and buildings including churches, restaurants, clubs and public passenger vehicles such as buses, taxis and Ubers.

Anyone who denies legitimate access to a person and their registered assistance dog, or adds a fee or charge for the dog's use or access, will face a fine of up to $4000.

A hard line is also taken with anyone who pretends their dog is a registered assistance dog. Faking it will attract a $3200 fine.

...

What happens when a Uber Pool rider brings a service dog or emotional animal and it offends a fellow pool rider? The driver will be the recipient of a low rating because he allowed the animal on the pool ride. Other riders are probably nit aware of the policies, procedures and legislation relating to service animals. Does Uber mandate that a rider traveling with a service animal must order or request an X or XL ride?

 

[Jack Malarkey]

What happens when a Uber Pool rider brings a service dog or emotional animal and it offends a fellow pool rider? The driver will be the recipient of a low rating because he allowed the animal on the pool ride. Other riders are probably nit aware of the policies, procedures and legislation relating to service animals. Does Uber mandate that a rider traveling with a service animal must order or request an X or XL ride?

We don't have UberPOOL here in Canberra: the only Australian cities that have UberPOOL
are Melbourne and Sydney.

That said, the legal principle underpinning the present and proposed legislation here is that an assistance animal accompanying the person it is intended to assist has legal access to all places to which that person has legal access.

Actual or potential offence to any other passenger would not be a valid reason for denying access or requiring the passenger to request a larger car.

 

[Bubsie]

If you are taking Uber Pool you should know its going to tank your ratings as angry riders take out their frustrations with other pool pax on you.

 

[Jack Malarkey]

The ACT Government on Tuesday 30 July 2019 rejected Opposition attempts for the animal welfare Bill to be referred to a Legislative Assembly committee for further scrutiny.

(https://www.canberratimes.com.au/st...eens-aghast-after-steels-animal-welfare-snub/)