Campaign Resources

What to Include in Your Submission

Choose the issues that resonate most with you. You don’t need to cover everything, even focusing on one or two points makes a powerful submission.

Start with your position

“I offer conditional support to this Bill IF the following amendments are adopted. Without these changes, particularly the Tier 1 issues, this Bill perpetuates the failures.”

Then choose from these critical gaps:

We’ve organised them by priority to help you focus on what matters most.

TIER 1: CRITICAL (Non-Negotiable)

These gaps will result in animal deaths and suffering if not fixed.

1. Animals treated as property

• Current law treats animals as property, which limits the ability of responders to prioritise their welfare. We urge the Bill to explicitly recognise animal sentience and welfare during emergencies, to ensure decisions are not solely based on property considerations.
• The Bill uses ‘human life’ language (Clauses 3, 125, 128.1, 161.1) without recognising animals as sentient. Animals are treated as objects/property in emergency powers rather than as sentient stakeholders. 
• The Animal Welfare Act 1999 recognises animals as sentient (capable of feeling pain, fear, joy). This Bill must align with that recognition. This means animals’ welfare must be considered on its own terms; ‘destroy’ must be last resort (with vet assessment), not default; emergency responders must prioritise animal welfare, not just incidental human benefit. Need: Amend Clause 3 (Purpose) and Clauses 125, 128.1, 161.1 to include ‘people and animals’; add sentience language throughout.

2. No plan for rescued animals

• What happens after rescue? Current powers to ‘destroy’ animals only apply during states of emergency and can be made unilaterally. Any decision to euthanise should require consultation with a registered veterinarian.
• Many animals aren’t formally ‘rescued’ but become displaced during evacuations. Current provisions only apply during states of emergency. We need extended holding periods (30 days, not the current 7) to give families time to find their animals. In Hurricane Katrina, less than 5% of animals were reunited with their families.
• Insert new clause after Clauses 129 & 162 (Powers to enter premises and places) specifying: 30-day holding period (not just during state of emergency), microchip scanning, adoption-first rehoming hierarchy, protection for disability assistance dogs, detailed record-keeping, Crown funding for all animal care costs and requirement that any euthanasia decision must be made in consultation with a registered veterinarian. Destruction for convenience prohibited

3. Red tape blocks fast rescue

• Responders must “contact owner first” (Clauses 129.3, 162.3) even during active disasters
• Need: Remove this delay; allow immediate entry when animals face imminent danger

4. Assistance dogs ignored

• Disabled people won’t evacuate without their dogs
• Insert new clause(not currently addressed in Bill; related to Clause 128 evacuation powers): Explicit protection so assistance dogs stay with handlers; evacuation centres must accommodate them

5. No coordination between agencies

• Who rescues companion animals? Farmed animals? Wildlife? The Bill doesn’t say. Currently in NZ no agency is mandated and funded for animal disaster rescue.
• Amend Clause 69-70 (Lead Agencies) to designate: Clear responsibilities (FENZ = companion animals, MPI = farmed animals, DOC = wildlife, NEMA = coordination)

6. No plan for farmed animals in disasters

• Australia’s fires show the reality: hundreds of thousands trapped
• Amend:  Clause 91 (Regional Planning requirements) to require animal-specific protocols and designate MPI as lead agency (Clause 69-70). Farmers generally want to care for their animals but need clear authority and coordination support from MPI and Civil Defence to act quickly when disaster strikes. 
• Need: Animal-specific protocols that support farmers’ efforts with coordination as they request it

7. Animal Welfare Act (AWA) can be overridden in emergencies

• The Animal Welfare Act legally applies during emergencies (Clause 12) but can be overridden by emergency powers. Emergency management personnel often don’t understand AWA requirements, creating confusion about animal welfare responsibilities during disasters.
• Need: Link Bill to AWA (Clauses 202-204); ensure sentience recognition cannot be overridden; keep welfare standards explicitly enforceable during emergencies.

8. ‘Emergency’ doesn’t include events affecting animals

• The Bill’s definition of ’emergency’ and ’emergency management’ doesn’t explicitly include events affecting animals

• Need: Amend Clause 6 (meaning of emergency) to include events affecting animals that are beyond capabilities of emergency services or require significant coordination; Amend Clause 5 (emergency management definition) to include “safety of the public, animals, or property

9. No requirement for evidence-based planning

• Nothing mandates that emergency plans use current scientific and technical evidence
• Need: Mandate that emergency regulations, plans, strategies, rules, codes, and other documents prescribed under the Bill must use scientific and technical evidence in their development

TIER 2: HIGH PRIORITY (Essential for Comprehensive Protection)

Without these, animals will continue to suffer unnecessarily.

10. Frontline responders unfunded

• Groups like HUHA operate as volunteers
• Need: Formal recognition as essential services (Clauses 7, 44-45, 69-71); Territorial authorities already have mandate for companion animals. Bill should clarify that charities working under territorial authority agreements can be contracted and reimbursed, with costs eligible for central government reimbursement.

11. Wildlife protection missing

• No clear DOC mandate or ecosystem framework. All animals (native, introduced, or urban) can suffer during disasters. While some planning exists for high-profile species like stranded whales, there’s no comprehensive approach to protecting wildlife during events like forest fires, floods, or droughts. 
• Amend Clauses 69-70 (Lead Agencies), 77 (National Strategy), 83-87 (National Plan) to designate DOC for wildlife response, clear wildlife rescue protocols; integration with biodiversity goals

12. Can’t enter marae for animal welfare

• Entry only allowed for human life, not animals
• Amend Clauses 129.2c & 162.2c (currently exclude marae from animal welfare entry), include animal welfare as valid justification; recognise cultural significance of mokai kuri; develop protocols with iwi

13. No lessons management

• Lessons from all emergencies must be captured, including animal welfare success and failures. 
• Amend: Clause 168 (After Action Reports) to require animal welfare component: mandatory After Action Reports stored in National Library; include animal welfare; require evidence-based updates

14. No national strategy

• Only regional requirements create inconsistent care.
• Animals are a core part of emergency response and deserve consistent national standards.
• Need: National framework (Clauses 77-87); consistent standards; coordinated resources

TIER 3: MODERATE PRIORITY (Important Improvements)

These create a more robust system over time.

15. No independent oversight

• No mechanism to ensure recommendations and public concerns, including issues around animal emergency response, are properly considered. 
• Need: Independent Inspector-General (like Queensland/Victoria models); ensures accountability and transparent decision-making

16. Response methods can harm animals

• Helicopters, sirens, evacuations may injure wildlife.
• The Animal Welfare Act already provides some pragmatic exclusions around emergency circumstances, but explicit assessment requirements would strengthen protections.
• Amend Clauses 130, 163 (Cordon management), 202-204 (Liability protections): Require assessment of secondary harm; mandate mitigation; train responders

Closing statement

“These amendments are essential, not optional.”