Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 3 Hansard (27 March) . . Page.. 742 ..

MS FOLLETT (continuing):

The new factors include the physical and mental condition of the applicant. I understand, Mr Speaker, that the registrar may request medical certificates if he judges that it is necessary to satisfy himself of the mental and physical fitness of a person to hold a weapons licence. My own view is that, if this additional test actually cuts down on the number of permits that are issued, then it is well worthy of support.

One of the major provisions in the Bill, Mr Speaker, is the new procedures for licensing security personnel in relation to visiting foreign dignitaries. I must admit that again I had grave concerns about this provision in the Bill. Up until now, of course, there was no way in the ACT that a weapons permit could be issued to the security personnel of foreign dignitaries or, indeed, to the foreign dignitaries themselves, simply because they could not meet the provisions of our Weapons Act. It is therefore the case that, whilst the Commonwealth may have made arrangements for weapons to be brought into the Territory by foreign dignitaries' parties, there was a certain amount of turning of a blind eye to the strict letter of the law in relation to those guns in the Territory. On balance, I think, Mr Speaker, it is better to have some rules than to have none at all, particularly when we knew that the law was, in effect, being broken. So, the new provisions in the Bill which do establish a protocol actually fill a vacuum. Whilst, as I have said, I am loath to be seen to be permitting additional weapons in the Territory, I do think it is better to have some rules and to ensure that there is at least some regulation of the activity by visiting foreign dignitaries. So, we will be supporting that particular provision. I am aware that the Commonwealth and in particular the AFP's international area have been fully consulted on this provision in the Bill. I understand that they are satisfied with the arrangement and indeed are quite pleased to see that some arrangement is being made. So, it probably is a sensible action for the Government to take.

A further provision in the Bill, Mr Speaker, is to create a new category of "inoperable weapons licence". This is a special arrangement, as you might imagine, for collectors items, for weapons which are no longer considered to be operable and which presumably nobody has any intention of using as weapons. What will occur there is that the registrar will be issuing guidelines on how to render these weapons inoperable. Those guidelines have been developed in conjunction with the AFP's ballistics area, and it is my understanding that a certificate will have to be issued for every weapon that is so licensed. I think this is a realistic arrangement, Mr Speaker. It will at least allow the registrar to keep tabs on these kinds of weapons, which, I would guess, are often not licensed at all at the present time. However, there is a danger here that a weapon even though rendered inoperable can be used to threaten. I think it is a serious matter that there ought to be no proliferation of such weapons in our community. There certainly ought not to be any risk taken with the ownership or use of those weapons.

The Bill goes on to ban additional weapons, Mr Speaker, including semiautomatic weapons. Semiautomatic weapons were dealt with some time ago, but under the Consumer Affairs Act rather than under the Weapons Act. It seems to me to be only commonsense to bring them into the Weapons Act purview. So, obviously, I would support the move of semiautomatic weapons bans from the Consumer Affairs Act to the Weapons Act. The additional weapons that are banned include some real mystery items,

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .