Committees
Standing Committee on Legislation
Motion
Resumed from an earlier stage of the sitting.
That the reporting date for the Standing Committee on Legislation inquiry into the Firearms Act 2024 be extended from 28 August 2025 to 16 October 2025.
Hon Stephen Dawson (Leader of the House) (4:18 pm): On behalf of the government, I indicate our support for the Standing Committee on Legislation's request to the chamber today. I note from the committee's report that due to the extraordinarily high number of submissions received, and to enable the hearings to be organised, the committee resolved to seek an extension of time in which it is to report on the referral—that is, from the date of 28 August 2025 to 16 October 2025. I am advised that this extension of time was requested to enable the committee to properly discharge its reporting obligations to the Council. Noting the request of the committee and the importance of this work, the government will support the motion.
Hon Nick Goiran (Leader of the Opposition) (4:18 pm): I rise on behalf of the opposition to deal with this request by the Standing Committee on Legislation for an extension of time and indicate that the opposition will support the request. By way of explanation, on 28 May this year I moved a motion seeking for the Firearms Act and the regulations—the entire package—to be considered by the Standing Committee on Legislation. It is not necessary this afternoon to revisit the reasons this house agreed to that. By way of brief explanation, at the time, the motion I moved indicated that the committee should report within three months. Since that time I was asked behind the Chair what the rationale was for selecting three months. I indicate to the house at this time that there was no great science behind the choice of three months; it was simply a period of time because a period of time needed to be selected. To the extent that any great consideration was given to it, it was in my mind at the time that the Standing Committee on Uniform Legislation and Statutes Review, which routinely has matters referred to it, is obliged to report to the house within a 45-day timeframe. Having served on that committee in a previous Parliament and on the basis of multiple contributions made by members on that committee over the journey, I know that that 45-day timeframe is very tight. It seemed to me that a large job like this obviously should be done over a period of time greater than 45 days. The question then becomes: how long should it be given?
The other matter that I had in my mind at the time was that there is obviously a great deal of angst within the community, particularly from law-abiding firearms owners who are trying to navigate this difficult matter, and they would like something done urgently. Where does one decide to land with respect to a period of time? As a result, I simply chose three months. Had anyone suggested at the time that it should be a greater period of time, I would have had no fundamental objection to that. In that context, I am grateful that the standing committee took the time to draw to our attention the status of the matter. It is instructive for us to note that more than 2,000 submissions have been provided to this inquiry to date. It is also encouraging to hear that the committee intends to hold hearings. I note the remarks made by the chair of the committee earlier today that the committee considers hearings to be important to this inquiry as they allow for the investigation of reported problems emerging from the implementation and operation of the legislation. With the greatest of respect, had there not been hearings on this matter, it would have only poured fuel on a political fire that is currently raging. It is very important for people to be able to have their say; in fact, it is really the genesis of the problems at the moment that the government has not listened enough.
If the committee says that it needs a relatively brief extension of time, my suggestion to members is that we ought not quibble with that. I note that the referral would require a report by 28 August. We will not be sitting in this chamber on 28 August because that week has been allocated for the Standing Committee on Estimates and Financial Operations to conduct its business, a matter that was not known to the chamber when we moved and considered the motion on 28 May. That being so, the committee would otherwise have to report in September. It is now asking that it report on 16 October. As I indicated, the opposition has no opposition to that; rather, it would be quite irrational if the house were not to agree to an extension of time at this stage.
Question put and passed.
