Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to make my contribution to the very poorly named Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Firearms and Customs Laws) Bill 2026. If you'd called it the 'firearms and customs law bill', it would have been much more honest, but I do acknowledge that we are dealing with the horrific events, or the aftermath of the horrific events, of Bondi on 14 December and that there's a desire to make a connection. And, as I said yesterday, we must do everything that we possibly can in this place to ensure that Australia again becomes safe, and we'll pass some other legislation later in the day to do that.

But I can't support this legislation, because of the flaws that are in it. The fact that, frankly, the government wasn't prepared to work with the coalition to get bipartisan support for this legislation in the same way that John Howard did after the tragic events of Port Arthur in 1996 is an indictment of this government and a demonstration of the fact that they are about the politics and not the reality of the situation. I was a candidate in the 1998 election for the seat of Lyons, and I won't forget those lawful firearm owners who came to me (a) to put their perspective and (b) to place their trust in me as someone they intended to vote for despite the fact that we'd legislated for them to have tighter access to firearms. Now, I wasn't successful in that particular election, but I haven't forgotten the conversations nor the responsibility.

This legislation is a complete demonstration of the failure of leadership of the Prime Minister in managing this. The fact that the legislation was tabled a week ago—nobody had seen it. He hadn't come to the opposition, who had indicated for a considerable period of time since Bondi that we were prepared to work with the government as the Australian people wanted us to do to make some changes. The Prime Minister, despite calling for us to come together, has done nothing and failed to actually do the things that would bring us together. He mocked the coalition. He criticised the coalition, and, quite frankly, in calling for us to come together while not bringing us together, he was gaslighting the opposition, gaslighting the Jewish community and, in fact, gaslighting the Australian community—a complete failure of leadership. For him to now try and compare this legislation and some of its actions with John Howard, who actually did bring the country together, got bipartisan support and got the National Party to agree to the legislation in 1996, is actually quite offensive. It's quite offensive that he tries to appropriate the actions of John Howard in this debate because in this sense he has completely failed.

There are a number of measures in this legislation that we should have been able to agree on, and there are others that, with some improvement, could have formed some very sound legislation. But, of course, Labor thinks they know better, and I really wonder who they were actually listening to when they built this legislation. They clearly weren't listening to their own backbench because up until this morning this legislation prohibited a piece of equipment that Olympians use in Olympic competition. So who were they listening to? Who were Labor listening to in developing this legislation?

They tell us that this will have no impact on farmers and rural Australians, and they tell us that this will have no impact on sporting shooters. I don't believe them. Why should I? The evidence is completely to the contrary. Why would I? They don't even know what the impact is. They have no understanding. We hear it so often in the trotted out talking points that they run in this debate in relation to this matter. They have no concept of what tools are required by farmers to manage browsing on their farmers or the different forms of browsing, the different firearms you might need to deal with wallabies or wild deer or, as Senator McKenzie said earlier, wild pigs. So the artificial limitations on the number of firearms available are a limitation on the tool kit available to farmers and rural Australians in managing their farms.

They say that if you're not a citizen, you won't be able to get access to firearms. What about the non-citizen farmers? What about the Australian residents who run farms? I know some. They're not Australia residents, but they have the same problems as every other farmer in managing feral wildlife. That's not considered as part of this legislation. What about the non-resident Australian farming workforce that also assists? Senator Steele-John was talking about managing feral animals in parts of Western Australia. I'm sure some non-resident farmhands are assisting with that very important role. But they can't under this legislation, because they won't be allowed to have a firearm licence; they're excluded under the simple fix.

This government has no idea what it's legislating. They have no understanding of the unintended consequences of this legislation, so why should anybody trust them when they say it will have no impact on farmers? We know it will. What about those farmers who reload their shells? If they want to use a carriage device to find information about reloading the shells appropriately, so that they get the right amount of shot in the shell, that's an offence under this legislation. We're not sure about the impact of that. What if an Olympian finds out that, in the United States, there is a new technology around reloading shells that gives the Americans an advantage? Are they going to be impacted? This lot don't know; they can't tell us. And nobody was consulted; I was listening to the evidence at the hearings last week. They have no idea what they're legislating here, so why should we trust them? I don't believe them when they say nobody is going to be impacted, because they don't know themselves. So why should we pass bad legislation? It's a pattern that we've, sadly, grown used to with this government—a failure of leadership, a failure to bring us together, a failure of consultation and, in this circumstance, a failure to genuinely understand.

Here's a photograph, through a scope, of browsing pressure on a farm in Tasmania. There's hardly room to put a sheep or a cow on that farm in between the browsing animals. Farmers need to have the right tools to manage their properties properly. On that same farm, where all those wallabies are competing with grass that might be used for sheep or cattle, is a vineyard. The next day there are wild deer in the vineyard. There is a different firearm required for the wallabies to the deer, or perhaps the birds that might come in and take grapes off the vines at different times of the year. Farmers need to have the toolkit. I don't believe the government when they say this legislation won't restrict them, because it's clear to me that there are unintended consequences. The fact is that, until this morning, an Olympian couldn't have a jacket that would hold 50 shells—which is an Olympic requirement—because they were restricted to 30.

The buyback is another example of the failure of leadership of this government. As I said before, it's offensive that the government tried to appropriate John Howard's buyback in their arguments for this buyback. John Howard worked with the states, set up a process, made sure that appropriate payment for firearms was paid, supported small business—and then he paid for it all. He didn't just announce it and then say to the states, 'By the way, you're paying half,' without any consultation first—which is what this government has done. This government talks about us coming together and this being a time for us to come together—yet they have done nothing to bring us together, and they present us with this flawed legislation. I'm not surprised they've done the political deal they've done with the Greens, because they have no care for Australian farmers. And here we are with this bad and flawed legislation, which I cannot support.

It's a sad situation because, had the Prime Minister gone to the Leader of the Opposition in the days and weeks after the terrible events at Bondi and worked with her and other members of the parliament, we could have been standing in this place today with an agreement on legislation which we all understood and which did the job that we wanted it to do. It is a failure of leadership of the Prime Minister that we are not in that situation. It is a very, very sad situation for us to be in because, with genuine leadership, this legislation could have been so much better and it could have been something that we all supported. As I have said, there are a number of things in this legislation that we should be able to agree on—the background checks; some of the controls. But, because of the failure of leadership of this government, we're not in a position to be able to do that, and, therefore, I am not in a position to support the legislation.