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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 13 Hansard (5 December) . . Page.. 4446 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

A number of organisations were also listed. This was the same as the definition in the existing Weapons Act. It was not our view that it was appropriate to have organisations listed in legislation, and members have agreed that that is not appropriate. So, I am pleased that we have been able also to agree with other members about our definition of "approval", which I will move later, which we took from the regulations in New South Wales. So, there are definite criteria within the Act about what the registrar needs to refer to before he or she approves a club.

Mr Humphries had some disagreement about the amendments initially; but, as I said, I am very glad that we have all agreed to work together on this very important issue. I support Ms Follett's sentiments on that. The end result is good. It was, indeed, a very constructive meeting last night. I thank other members for their cooperation. Now we have a streamlined set of amendments. It is a very good example of members working well together on this important issue. I think the only point of disagreement still is in the definition of active membership of a club. The aim of that, obviously, is to show that a member of the club is genuinely participating in the activities of that club and that they participate in competitions or whatever at those clubs on at least six days. We wanted six. Other members think that four is more appropriate. We can have that discussion here today.

We have modified some of our amendments. Mr Humphries has agreed to withdraw some of his and also to amend some, such as the proposal to extend from six hours to three days the time for providing a licence when you are not carrying it with your weapon. I think the compromise there was 24 hours. We have also agreed not to proceed with our amendment about minimum age for minors. Firearms permits, we understand, will appear in the regulations.

Mr Speaker, the people of Australia were given the clear impression that all governments would take appropriate action to reduce the number of guns in our society. To quote from that meeting, "Together these reforms mean fewer guns. Fewer guns mean a safer Australia for all Australian families". I am very happy that members of this Assembly have worked together to ensure that we do have that safer community.

MR KAINE (12.11): Mr Speaker, the Government's Firearms Bill 1996 implements in the ACT the uniform national program to regulate the possession of firearms throughout Australia after the Port Arthur disaster. The Prohibited Weapons Bill 1996 replaces the old Weapons Act 1991 as a consequence of the new Firearms Bill. No Australian in his or her right mind would disagree that it is essential that governments regulate the keeping of weapons. The question is: How far should that regulation extend? It has been said that it is people, not guns, that kill. There is a range of means by which one human being can take the life of another. It is not only guns. The family home is packed with potential weapons - from the knife that father uses to carve the Sunday roast, to the electric current in the lamp that lets him see what he is doing; from the axe with which he splits the logs used to fuel the slow combustion heater, to the cleaners that mother uses to clean up the house.

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