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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 5 Hansard (15 May) . . Page.. 1473 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

I understand also, Mr Wood, that there are national guidelines, which we, of course, follow, in relation to starting pistols. Indeed, I think the question of starting pistols was specifically raised during the gun debate, because they are a completely legitimate form of sporting equipment and really unrelated to actual firearms use, as such. That is why we have national guidelines. If you and Mr Humphries and I can have a chat about that, hopefully, we will be able to work out something for your constituent.

I want to make a couple of other points. I note that the buyback scheme in the ACT has been highly successful, in terms of the number of weapons handed in. In fact, I think it is greater than the number that were actually out there as registered. It has gone exceptionally well. I understand, too, that it has been extended to September. I think it is important in this debate now, once we have these very strong pieces of legislation in place, not only here but also interstate, that people do not lose sight of the fact that there are a number of bona fide, appropriate and proper uses of firearms, which are dealt with in the Act.

There is a large number of law-abiding citizens who still have firearms, who use them entirely for a law-abiding purpose, certainly in the sporting shooters arena, where competitions are very well controlled. There is a large number of ACT residents, and indeed Australians generally, who derive much enjoyment from that form of activity. I think their rights have to be respected in this debate, too. Whilst there are now very appropriate restrictions on other uses of firearms, obviously people in our rural areas still have a very legitimate need for firearms. Whilst there are most sensible requirements now in place in relation to people engaged in recreational hunting, which have tightened up a lot of possibilities for potential abuse, they also have legitimate rights.

I think the citizens of the ACT, the gun owning public, in general have responded very well to the amnesty, to the requirement to hand in weapons that have become unlawful. I think generally the buyback scheme in the ACT has been handled very well indeed. I commend my colleague and his department for that. Especially, I would commend the actions of and the dedication shown by the members of the Australian Federal Police who have been involved with that scheme on a daily basis since its inception. Firearms owners I have talked to, in the main, are quite commendatory of the efforts of the police, and I think that should be put on record.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General) (12.08), in reply: Mr Speaker, in closing this debate, let me thank members for their support for this important piece of legislation. It was necessitated, of course, by an unexpected decision in the Magistrates Court; but, with hindsight, one might have anticipated such a result. It is therefore gratifying to see that, notwithstanding the retrospectivity involved, members are prepared to confirm that the buyback arrangement will continue and that the amounts being paid and that have been paid under that buyback will be the amounts which have been agreed already by the various jurisdictions and which have been the basis for payment over the last 12 months; namely, the schedule prepared by the Commonwealth Attorney-General's Department.

Let me just say about that generally that it is true that that process results in some people getting less for their gun than it is actually worth. It is absolutely true. It is also true that some people get more for their gun than it is actually worth. The reason we have a nationally agreed schedule is that there are literally millions of guns in Australia at the

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