← All decisions

1. What was proposedCaitlin ToughLabor · Government backbench
   Read the original wording (400 words)

   That this Assembly: (1) notes that: (a) hands-on field work with ACT wildlife, such as health assessment, sampling, tagging and non-lethal fertility control routinely depends on first anaesthetising or sedating the animal, including in remote locations; (b) under: (i) the Veterinary Practice Regulation 2018: (A) administering an anaesthetic agent without the immediate and direct supervision of a veterinarian is a restricted act (schedule 1, part 1.2, item 3); and (B) carrying out treatments, procedures or tests that should not be carried out unless the animal is sedated is a restricted act (schedule 1, part 1.2, items 1-2), as is taking tissue samples (item 22); and (ii) section 10(1) of the Veterinary Practice Act 2018, it is an offence for a person who is not a registered veterinarian to carry out a restricted act; and (c) the practical implications of (1)(b) are that: (i) highly trained ecologists, researchers and other environmental professionals cannot carry out tasks necessary for their work without a veterinarian present; (ii) welfare outcomes are not automatically improved by having a veterinarian present; and (iii) when no vet is available the result is fewer health checks and less data on species; (2) recognises that: (a) a 2025 paper in Australian Mammalogy (Bino and Hawke, AM24029): (i) shows trained non-veterinarians have safely anaesthetised more than 500 platypuses over nine years; and (ii) argues for a streamlined accreditation pathway so this proven method can be used more widely; (b) with the record showing that non-vets can administer wildlife anaesthetics safely, the question is whether the rules should enable safe and efficient administration of established methods; and (c) a good accreditation pathway can retain current standards, including species-specific training, proven competency, lawful drug authority and ongoing veterinary and animal ethics oversight; and (3) calls on the Government to: (a) consider amending the regulation so that accredited non-veterinarians may perform field anaesthesia on wildlife and the sampling and health procedures it enables, without the on-site attendance of a veterinarian, and in doing so, seek advice from the ACT Veterinary Practitioners Board as to: (i) how ACT regulations currently align with those in other states and territories; and (ii) what accreditation scheme or other pathway would better support appropriately trained and authorised personnel to undertake this work; and (b) report back to the Assembly by the last sitting week of 2026 on whether the regulation will be amended and, if so, when. Debate ensued.

2. What the Assembly decidedAgreed

   Decided on the voices: no individual votes were recorded, so this doesn’t show that every MLA agreed.