Ross Cadell (NSW, National Party, Shadow Minister for Water) Share this | Hansard source

I will be shorter than my allocated time here because I know that many people wish to talk, but I do want to address some things have that have been said. I would like to start by saying something that I know is controversial, but I mean it. If you were to seek to punish 813,000 Muslims in Australia after this attack, you would be called an extremist because you would be, fair and simple. But, if you want to punish 940,000 gunowners in this country for what happened, you are the Prime Minister. That is unfair. It is unfair that a group of people who have done nothing are being punished for something that they have never done.

What we heard in some of the things Senator Pocock said really crossed party lines and crossed everything. We hear about gun buybacks and we hear about the potential for the capping of state funds out there. If you went to Southern Cross Small Arms and bought a Taipan X for $1,800 yesterday or the day before this happened, do you get $500 back for it? You mentioned ammunition. If I go and buy a box of Barnes .416 Rigby ammunition, 20 of those—it's $20 a round—I have $400 in a single box of ammunition. So where does that go to protecting the people who have done the right thing? No-one should be able to group-punish. I remember in school, if someone did something stupid in school and we all got held back, we hated that kid. We are group-punishing again here, and it is unfair.

I do not blame the Greens for being consistent in their policy position of supporting these bills. They are consistent, they are where they are, and they want to do it. I blame the government for rushing this through—us being told that it was not for changing. 'We're not splitting this, and we are not changing this.' We are here. It has been split. And I can't keep up with the changes from the four different versions there were yesterday and the one that came in at 6.13 am this morning, where things like the importation of sporting apparel changed. There was a ban last night—and I think even this morning first thing—on belts, ammunition and clothing that can hold more than 30 rounds. My Levi's can hold 30 .22s in their pocket. My wranglers can hold 30 rounds of .22 in their pocket. Now that's changed. We are talking about the reaction of banning the importation of gel blaster beads as a reaction to our terrorist attack—gel blasting, which is a sport in Queensland, much like paintball, much like things like that. We're talking about banning gel blaster beads as a response to a terrorist attack. This is not fair. This is not a position where the government is trying to make the problem go away for Australian people; this is a problem where the government is trying to make the political problem go away for a prime minister. That is what this is about.

Coming back early to discuss, to be sensible, to do what this place does best—and we have seen it many times where we have worked together to get solutions that are important—has happened. To come back to be given a bill of 'take it or leave it' with no consultation and then change it is ridiculous. It is ridiculous. We sit here with another bill coming this afternoon. I don't think anyone in this chamber is absolutely for or against either of these bills—they are nuanced, some of these positions—but we have to make a binary choice: yes or no.

On this ammunition bill, the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Firearms and Customs Laws) Bill, I hear people getting up from the other side and saying, 'This bill will stop noncitizens getting firearms.' It will not. It has nothing about that whatsoever, but they want to pretend it does. It doesn't do that. That is a state basis because, as was said before, states and territories have the point on this. When we are talking about a buyback program that doesn't have the buy-in of all the states yet—we have a number of states saying they are not involved. It goes against the gun accord. It goes against all of these things. And it is wrong.

There are so many hunters up in the Hunter Valley, where I come from. I could name some of my friends who have weapons now who have to give them back. I talked about that Taipan straight pull, the Taipan X, from Southern Cross Small Arms. It is not a self-loading rifle. It is not a repeating rifle. It is a straight pull. It is potentially a pump pull. It is a good sporting weapon for recreational hunting and pest eradication. Now that is illegal in New South Wales and, not part of this, now you can't import it either. So, if I am a hunter, if I am a target shooter or if I am a sport shooter, I am limited in what I can get. There are still questions about all the weapons used in the Olympic events, especially the pistols, and being able to import all parts of these things. It is a positive thing that there is finally funding, after 3½ years, for the national register. That is a good thing—I don't pretend it is not—but we have had 3½ years to fund that.

To all my friends, to all those people out there and to the 64,000-odd people that we got in trouble for carrying the non-compliant petition for earlier today, I say to you: I am sorry that we haven't been able to stop this to make this better. There are definitely things that we support in it, like the ASIO checks and the national register, but there is some stuff in there that has just been in the bottom drawer on a wish list of a bureaucrat who doesn't like guns and wants to get them out. It is not the crossbench's fault. It's not the Greens' fault. It is not this side's fault. It is the Labor Party's fault for wanting the problem—a political problem—to go away quickly and not a policy solution. To the 940,000 registered gun owners out there: I am sorry for what is happening to you. It is being done unfairly, it is being done quickly and it is being done without due process. I will not vote for that. I cannot vote for that. You need to know who is to blame for that, and it is solely the government.