Right: Psychologists refer to the ‘therapeutic bond’ that develops between elderly pet owners and their animals. Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Further implications
The partially conflicting interests of landlords and pet-owning tenants make this a fraught issue.
Many landlords believe that their ownership rights are being challenged as pets have the capacity to damage properties.
Defenders of tenants claim prohibiting pets reduces the tenants' capacity to have the 'quiet enjoyment' of the property. This argument stems from the belief that pet ownership is an important element of Australian domestic living that cannot reasonably be withheld merely because the tenant is renting rather than owns the home he or she lives in.
This point has been made by Tenants Union of Queensland coordinator, Penny Carr. Ms Carr has stated, 'I would love to run a test case on whether pet owners had a right to house pets on their rental property.
I think there is an argument in saying that not allowing pets is a breach of the right to "quiet enjoyment of the property".
You have a contract which says this is your home and you can't do anything illegal in that home, but other than that you have a right to peace and comfort and privacy in using that property.' It may require such a legal challenge as Ms Carr foreshadows to effect a substantial change in Australian tenancy laws which currently give the determining power to the landlord.
Pressure for such a change is mounting as animal refuges across Australia respond to the influx of surrendered animals, a significant proportion of which have been unwillingly given up by tenants who cannot find pet-friendly accommodation.
As a prelude to any fundamental change in the tenancy laws such that they prevent a landlord discriminating against a tenant on the basis of pet ownership, it may be necessary to make it possible to charge pet bonds in all Australian states and territories. Currently, this can be done in New South Wales, Western Australia and the Northern Territory.
The repeated refusal of the New South Wales Parliament to establish a select committee on pet-owning tenants as part of a broader discussion of animal welfare indicates this is not yet seen as a significant political issue.
Over the decade to 2005-06, the proportion of Australian households renting from a state or territory housing authority remained stable at around 5%, while the proportion renting privately rose from 19% to 22%. It appears that a larger number of relatively wealthy people are taking up rental accommodation, particularly those who wish to live in inner cities. Commenting on social trends in 2008, the Australian Bureau of Statistics noted, 'Renting is relatively common among young adults and low income households. In addition, some high income households may choose to rent for financial, lifestyle or other reasons.'
If this trend toward wealthier tenants continues, the pressure to allow pet ownership among them is likely to increase. Further, as the Australian population ages and elderly citizens move out of their homes into various forms of supported accommodation, the demand that they be able to take their companion animals with them is also likely to grow.