Page 3787 - Week 13 - Thursday, 18 October 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The New South Wales figures show that significantly higher gun availability in rural areas is accompanied by significantly higher rates of gun deaths when compared with the city. The widespread availability of guns means that all too often violence in the home can escalate into murder in the heat of the moment.
The present Bill, in fact, reflects provisions which, last year, my Government agreed should be drafted. As introduced, the Bill provides that a weapons licence is cancelled if the holder becomes the subject of a domestic violence protection order. Further provisions would empower the court to order the seizure of weapons if that should be appropriate. The Bill provides a safety net so that those who can demonstrate a case to the court can apply to retain their weapons. The court would be required to consider the same matters it considers when granting the domestic violence protection order - that is, ensuring the protection from violence of the applicant for the protection order. These provisions are sensible and I am confident that they will be supported by all members of this Assembly. As Mr Collaery has said this morning, the Bill as introduced is dependent upon the related Weapons Bill 1990 to bring it into effect.
The amendments that Mr Collaery has put before us this morning, in fact, make the Bill apply to the existing gun licensing legislation, the Gun Licence Act 1937. It is extremely disappointing to us, on this side of the house, that the new Weapons Bill has not significantly progressed. It is a matter which I believe is urgent. It is a matter which I believe could have been produced well before this time. Mr Collaery has spoken about consultation; but the fact is that it is a long, long time since his so-called exposure draft was, indeed, exposed to the light of day. I cannot understand what has taken him so long.
If you look at the domestic violence legislation which has been passed in this house, we ought to bear in mind that, in fact, Mr Collaery took 8 months to introduce the Domestic Violence (Amendment) Bill (No. 2), which had in fact been substantially drafted while I was still in office. I think that the Bill that we have before us this morning, and the amendments which are necessary to it, demonstrate that this Government is incapable of putting forward progressive legislation. The Weapons Bill, which is essential to this community - essential to extend the protection of the whole community - has not been within Mr Collaery's competence so far. We have had evidence with the previous Domestic Violence (Amendment) Bill to demonstrate that it takes Mr Collaery an awfully long time to do the most basic and necessary tasks to protect the community.
As I said, we will be supporting the Bill and the amendments, but it is with some disappointment that we have to note that the amendments are necessary because of the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .