A 3 Year Trial allowing Pets on public transport, into public government areas & pubs
0 have signed. Let’s get to 1,000!
The present laws are discriminatory against homeless people who are being forced to choose either having accommodation or staying with their pet. It goes against the benefits that it has been overwhelmingly shown pet ownership provides adding a financial burden to the community when services have to be provided to meet these needs and still the need is unmet.
Not allowing pets on public transport leaves people who are already expecting financial hardship at risk of getting a fine if they need to take their pet further than the animals legs can walk.
This can easily be rectified by having, as is now provided for people wanting to have a quiet journey, with an extra pets carriage on all trains and requiring that all animals be restrained on all public transport. It has been shown in Europe and America that it is possible to carry pets on public transport without there being any major incidents.
Additionally, it impacts on the environment as people are forced to purchase cars if they wish to transport their pet somewhere as pets are presently banned from all private car rental companies and shared car service providers cars. Legally if you want to transport your pet anywhere the only way to do so is via private car.
Presently, the only reasons that pets are not being allowed into more places is due to laws that were not implemented after a trial but inherited and continued and have not been updated to reflect the changes in modern life ie more families renting, living in apartments and not houses, increased social isolation, and loneliness at an epidemic level.
Allowing landlords to blanket ban pets on their properties has resulted in homeless people not being able to be accommodated as they refuse to leave their pet to fate so choose to stay on the streets.
Increased the number of animals being surrendered to shelters and putting the animals life at risk due to an untried change. This trial would at least ease up on the number of animals being surrendered and the heartbreak that causes for all involved.
A trial that allows people to take their pets with them into restaurants/cafes but have them away from service areas, into public government buildings such as libraries, museums and art galleries encourages those who are dealing with social isolation due to mental health issues the opportunity to get out as they are not forced to go solo.
It also means that families and others living in small spaces have more options on where to take their pet as parks and green space are being eaten up by development and shows that we are a modern country able to keep pace with our European and American counterparts.
Presently, with pets not being allowed on trains, in taxis or only on some public transport at the discretion of the driver means that if a homeless person or anyone without a car needs to transport their pet anywhere they are at risk of fine for those who are homeless or in financial hardship this is detrimental to their recovery as it adds another burden to their situation and could cause them to not be able to access veterinary care for their pet leaving a pet in physical and emotional distress.
Additionally, as pets are banned from being carried in all private rental company cars and in any shared services cars and on public transport and only in taxis at the drivers discretion it is leading to greater car ownership and impacts on the environment.
I know I bought a car just so that I could take my dog with me to all the places I wanted to go and have kept my car simply as there is no other way I can do so.
It has also been shown that people who love animals and bond with them are the least likely to be violent or to harm others so surely we actually do want people to have these relationships.
The stats below taken from the Pet Industry Association demonstrate that the stats to run a trial are clearly in favour of a trial being run
“More than 62% of Australian households own a pet. Of these, 38% are dog owners and 29% are cat owners. In addition to this, 59% of people who do not currently own a pet admit that they would like to own one in the near future.”
At the moment the laws are favouring the minority with no real justification or evidence to support them.
We know that loneliness is now at epidemic levels one way of beating that, that involves no cost to the government, is to run a 3 year trial.
I am suggesting 3 years to give the non-pet people a chance to get used to the changes and to really gather good evidence as to what is actually required to make pet rules work for all.
Complete your signature
0 have signed. Let’s get to 1,000!