Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I wish to place on the parliamentary record my strongest concerns regarding the Firearms Act 2024, which was rushed through the Western Australian parliament earlier this year on 19 June and was subsequently assented to eight days later on 27 June.

There is a constituency of 90,000 licensed firearm owners in Western Australia who deserve sensible and rational policymaking. I commend members of the National Party for their strong advocacy on behalf of sporting shooters. Following the Howard-era National Firearms Agreement, best practice has been for a nationally consistent approach to firearms regulation across Australia. It is clear that the Western Australian Labor government has gone it alone on this issue and introduced legislation which is not consistent across Australian jurisdictions. This legislation was rushed through parliament in record time with neither proper scrutiny nor proper stakeholder consultation. The result is different regulations in different states. No state should go it alone, as inconsistent firearms laws within Australia are not best practice.

There are several aspects of the legislation and regulations which are flawed and should be repealed or amended. Imposing numerical limits on the number of firearms which can be licensed is arbitrary in nature and cannot be supported by evidence or logic. Rigorous scrutiny should instead be applied on the initial licence application, as access to the first firearm is where the main risk is. Licensing subsequent firearms does not pose incremental levels of risk to public safety. There are more than 40 different types of recognised shooting competitions, each requiring different specialist firearms to participate. Avid competitive shooters can easily reach the maximum firearms limit by competing in just two or three disciplines.

Rather than a numerical limit on firearms able to be licensed, graduated storage requirements for firearm owners possessing more than 10 firearms should be introduced, such as the requirement for safes with higher specifications and monitored alarm systems and CCTV to mitigate the risk of theft. Financial members of accredited shooting clubs and organisations should be exempt from the 10-firearms limit because they have access to a registered shooting range in which to safely use their licensed firearms and demonstrate that they are actively interested in shooting disciplines.

The requirement for firearms licence applicants to be interviewed by a police officer should be reintroduced, as was previously the case. Currently it is an online application with a 100-point ID verification at Australia Post. Applicants do not currently interact with a person who can assess their suitability.

Restricting individual firearm use to specific properties is overly bureaucratic and serves no useful purpose. A recreational shooter typically enjoys an outdoor lifestyle of camping, caravanning and four-wheel driving and usually shoots on several properties in rural and regional areas. Provided a property is of equivalent size and has suitable typography and provided proper permission is obtained from the owner, shooting can be conducted safely, and there is no valid reason to restrict firearms to specific properties. In addition, recreational shooters who join accredited shooting clubs should be exempt from providing regular property letters, as they have legitimate access to a registered range in which to safely use their licensed firearms.

In summary, I strongly oppose several elements of the Firearms Act 2024, which was rushed through the WA parliament earlier this year—in particular, the imposition of numerical limits on firearm ownership, restricting individual firearm use to specific properties and bureaucratic requirements imposed concerning the provision of property letters. I call upon the members of the Legislative Council of the Parliament of Western Australia to move disallowance motions and amendments to the legislation, with a view to reviewing the defective elements. It is clear that the Western Australian Labor government has gone it alone on this issue and introduced legislation which is not consistent across Australian jurisdictions.