Questions without notice and ministers statements
Drug detection dogs
Aiv PUGLIELLI (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (12:00): My question today is to Ms Georgie Purcell, member for Northern Victoria, and it relates to notice of motion 756, relating to a ban on sniffer dogs. I ask: when will you move this motion, given the urgency of this matter? I ask this because the motion calls for the end of the use of sniffer dogs at festivals and to let the doggies be doggies, a sentiment that I and my crossbench colleagues wholeheartedly support. Given that we know that the use of sniffer dogs at festivals puts people at risk and that this will be happening at the same time we are finally getting pill testing, it is totally illogical that inside a festival people will be able to receive harm reduction information and have their pills tested, but only if they run the gauntlet past the dogs or decide to take all their drugs at once to avoid the dogs. This issue is a critical issue which needs to be debated by this chamber. So with regard to timing, when are you bringing on this motion? Surely the time is now.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I will call Ms Purcell, but I will just note that under standing order 8.01(b) a member can ask another member about an item on the notice paper. There have been previous rulings that the answers be contained to the timing and so forth, but I do not think we have ever had a question that has actually extended. Next time I go to a presiding officers nerd fest, this might be a great opportunity to speak about something new. I am taking into account, Ms Purcell, there was an extended preamble added to the actual question.
Georgie PURCELL (Northern Victoria) (12:01): This is a little bit scary; I do not know how ministers do it. I thank the member for his question and for his interest in my motion. In my opinion, the time for this motion is right now. It is urgent with pill testing set to be in place over summer and the risk of mixing a crime response with a health-based response. But we are in the last sitting week of the year and there is no opportunity to bring this motion forward for debate, so I hope that we can address it as early as possible on the Parliament’s return. Unfortunately, the reality is that the festival season will be almost over. I know that all of the progressive crossbench is really keen to debate this motion and to talk about the issue. A shout-out to the pingers crew, Rachel and Aiv.
Aiv PUGLIELLI (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (12:02): Thank you for that response. I absolutely agree. Specifically with regard to timing, I ask: are you prepared to collaborate with me to ensure that this motion is debated before the end of this summer? It is so important that we get the opportunity to hear the thoughts of all members and particularly the government as to how this dangerous practice can be banned. This chamber will not be sitting while the festivals are occurring. People will be forced to run the gauntlet to make it to the drug-checking services. I would love to work with you to progress this motion and this issue.
Members interjecting.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I could hardly hear Mr Puglielli.
Georgie PURCELL (Northern Victoria) (12:03): I thank the member for his supplementary question. My response is: absolutely, bestie. Always happy to collab with you.