Ms BADGER question to MINISTER for POLICE, FIRE and EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, Mr ELLIS
After just two meetings of the Firearms Consultative Committee, you disbanded the group that back in February you claimed was being established to assist in the long term. Firearms crime in Tasmania has been rising on your watch, and reform certainly isn’t complete with the draft bill that’s been out for public consultation. There is more to be done that a consultative committee could assist with. Other states have established consultative groups for continuing reform and problem-solving. Why not Tasmania? Why did you disband the committee after just two meetings and what happened in that second meeting? What were the committees’ resolutions?
ANSWER
Thanks to the member for the question. The Firearms Consultative Committee is a commitment that we made at the last election. We’re really pleased to deliver it. We had an outstanding group of Tasmanians that were vital in terms of us being able to take a considered approach to developing legislation that gets the balance right, rather than some of the kneejerk reactions. It’s interesting, of course, that some of the people who were publicly opposed to setting up the firearms committee in the first place were then concerned that we longer needed them for this particular project –
Ms Badger – Who opposed setting up the whole committee?
Members interjecting.
The SPEAKER – Order, members of the Greens, allow the minister to finish.
Mr ELLIS – That, I think, demonstrates the importance of this project and that people have come on board with the concept. What we’ll be looking to do in future iterations of the Firearms Consultative Committee is make sure that the membership is right for the particular kinds of firearms legislative change that we may need in the future. You know, if it’s specifically around, for example, firearms manufacturing. We currently don’t have anyone with industry or manufacturing experience in our current membership. We’d always be looking to keep that updated, and have the right people at the table as part of the process.
In many ways the Firearms Consultative Committee has done a power of work to consult within that small group. Now we’ve delivered the legislation, it’s been consulted on more broadly. We had nine people who were consulted under that process, and based on the submissions that we’ve got back, we’ve now had more than 600 people who’ve been consulted as part of our public process. It’s now going to be coming back into parliament and will be consulted among all of us, and we can make a decision in this House and the other.
Our commitment is if there are future opportunities for reform in the firearms space, we’d be looking for the next iteration of the firearms committee membership. I’m not going to prejudge what those things might be, but certainly our firearms act continues to need reform at different times, and it’s important that we have the right people at the table.
There’s a commitment that we made, it’s delivered a power of work, and in terms of the individual meetings, the key point for discussion is the legislation that is now available for the public for feedback, and will be debated in this House very soon. It is pleasing that the people that were publicly opposed to it when we set it up are now publicly in support of it continuing. That is a good thing. We certainly give the commitment to this House that if there are future legislative reform needs, that certainly we’ll be looking to the next iteration of the Finance Consultative Committee to provide that support.
Supplementary Question
Ms BADGER – I’m not sure who was opposed to the concept of it. Minister, we also asked you specifically on the resolutions of that committee. After the first meeting, you did release the whole paper on what the committee had not only resolved but what they considered. There’s a broad range of topics across that. Can you release a similar piece that provides a summary on resolutions, minutes and considerations that were out of that second meeting? That is very important because members on that committee were shocked to get a phone call after this legislation was put forward that that committee was being disbanded. They believed that there was ongoing work, so we’d like to see what it was.
The SPEAKER – The honourable member’s time has expired.
Mr ELLIS – Speaker, so as I mentioned previously, to your first question, Roland Browne was opposed to it and then he was very supportive of it. I think that’s good that people are changing their mind and it’s positive that people –
Members interjecting.
The SPEAKER – Order.
Mr ELLIS – It’s in the public – you can have a look at it. More broadly, happy to follow up. There’s certainly notes and minutes that were taken and I’m happy to provide that further if it’s of interest to the parliament. Certainly the key outputs are the legislation that’s been publicly consulted on and there are a range of other discussions as well, particularly on what a process might look like for buying back firearms that are not currently registered, and how things might work in the mechanics of that. We are bringing together a range of different people to have those discussions. Now obviously the work that has been done from that committee is now publicly available, but happy to provide greater information to the House as soon as I can.
The SPEAKER – The honourable minister’s time has expired.
The SPEAKER – I will go to Mr Di Falco, who has jumped a number of times.
Dr Woodruff – Honourable Speaker. You usually ask clarity from a minister when they’ve made commitments like that, will the minister do it today?
Mr Ellis – I just said as soon as I can.
Dr Woodruff – What?
Mr Ellis – As soon as I can.
Dr Woodruff – What’s that?
Mr Ellis – As soon as I can.
Dr Woodruff – But surely there’s available minutes of a meeting?
The SPEAKER – Thank you honourable Leader of the Greens. The honourable member has made a commitment to the parliament. It will be as soon as he can. If he doesn’t, of course there’ll be other ways of dealing with it in this House.
