ANIMAL ACTIVISM —
TRESPASS
530. Hon MICHAEL MISCHIN to the Leader of the House
representing the Attorney General:
I refer to the Attorney General's
announcement reported in The West Australian of 23 May 2019 regarding
what he describes as ''mushy-headed vegans'' and that he will
change the law —
� in a substantial way that spells
trouble, big trouble for anyone who goes trespassing on agricultural land with
the intention of disrupting agriculture �
Including empowering courts to make
orders —
� that will not only see them on a future
occasion prosecuted for trespass but also for being in contempt of court �
(1) What
precisely are the changes that the Attorney General will introduce to deter
protesters from trespassing on agricultural property and interfering with
lawful agricultural activity, and when will he introduce them?
(2) Will the laws
extend to protesters trespassing upon non-agricultural property and interfering
with lawful activity unconnected with agriculture; and, if not, why not?
(3) Will the laws
extend to protests by unions and other pressure groups that involve trespass and
disruption of lawful activity; and, if not, why not?
(4) Will the laws
extend to prohibiting protesters from interfering with lawful activity by
affixing themselves to structures and equipment; and, if not, why not?
Hon SUE
ELLERY replied:
I thank the honourable member for
some notice of the question.
(1) The proposed
amendments target this form of unlawful protest, including by introducing
circumstances of aggravation for the criminal offence of trespass. The maximum
penalty in these circumstances will also be doubled. The new laws will be
introduced to Parliament at the earliest opportunity contingent on cabinet
approval and the usual legislative drafting process.
(2)–(4) No.
The proposal is a targeted response to a specific issue—the repeated
unlawful interference with agricultural activity by certain activists.