STATUTES AMENDMENT (SERIOUS FIREARM OFFENCES) BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 17 July 2012.)

The Hon. S.G. WADE (17:12): I rise on behalf of the Liberal opposition to indicate our support for the Statutes Amendment (Serious Firearm Offences) Bill 2012. The government tabled the bill in the House of Assembly on 13 June 2012 in response to the escalation of gun violence that Adelaide has experienced in 2012. The opposition welcomes the bill.

In fact, the Liberal opposition has been calling for action on firearms since early 2012, and finally the government has heeded the call. The consideration of this bill is timely, especially in the light of yet another shooting on Tuesday night. It is the Liberal Party's view that firearm offences are some of the most serious offences and threats to public safety and that that fact should be reflected in the law.

Since the Howard government's national gun buyback of 1996-97, Australia has actively aspired to be a low-firearms community. This bill is another step in furthering that goal. We as a party are keen to ensure that the bill does not unreasonably encroach on legitimate firearm possession on the one hand, and on the other hand we considered that it did not go far enough to protect those who put their lives on the line to protect our safety. In particular, we were concerned that the government's bill did not address misuse of firearms as it impacts on law enforcement officers.

It is in the public interest for law enforcement officers to be given enhanced protection from violence. Society has both a responsibility and a self-interest in actively discouraging violence against our police—police are those who regularly expose themselves to the risk of violence for the sake of protecting others from violence.

The need for enhanced protection was especially evident in the May 2010 shooting of SA Police patrol officers Nathan Mulholland and Tung Tran. These young officers responded to a domestic violence complaint in Salisbury at 5.15am. When they arrived, Mr Van Setten allegedly declared, 'You've been set up,' and shot them through the screen of the front door with a semi-automatic rifle.

Officer Mulholland received shrapnel wounds to the head and hand which required surgery. Officer Tran endured multiple shrapnel wounds in the right cornea, right forearm, left upper arm and chest. Today two metal fragments still remain in his eye. Mr Van Setten was originally charged with attempted murder, but the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions downgraded the charges and Van Setten pleaded guilty to the lesser charges of aggravated acts to endanger life, aggravated recklessly causing harm, and possession of a prescribed firearm, and was sentenced to nine years gaol.

The case highlighted the need for law reform and the Liberal Party received representations from the Police Association to that end. That is why the Liberal opposition proposed amendments which created an offence with a maximum of 25 years imprisonment where a shooter intended to injure a law enforcement officer, and 10 years where they intended to harm a law enforcement officer.

On the morning of 10 July 2012, the Liberal opposition announced our intention to create those offences. Later that day, the government announced that it would support the reforms. We appreciate the government's support for our amendment in relation to firearms offences against law enforcement officers and look forward to working constructively to further refine those amendments.

The bill will make significant changes to probation, parole and bail laws. The Liberal opposition supports the changes and will monitor their impact, particularly on law abiding South Australians. Once you are deemed to be a serious firearm offender, the bill requires you to serve an immediate term of imprisonment. I note that there is no minimum term required.

While the Liberal opposition welcomes the government's action in relation to this bill, we remind the council that far more needs to be done. In the last decade, more than 11,000 firearms have gone missing. Labor has introduced 2,300 new offences over those 10 years but laws do not make a safe world.

South Australians need to ask themselves: in spite of having 2,300 new offences, with 11,000 firearms missing, how can they feel safer? The government has cut more than $100 million from the police budget over the next four years and that will make it even harder for police to effectively enforce firearms laws. Again, I express the support of the opposition for this bill.

The Hon. A. BRESSINGTON (17:17): I rise to indicate my support for the Statutes Amendment (Serious Firearm Offences) Bill first introduced in another place by the Attorney-General. As the title suggests, the bill seeks to address firearm offending by creating a presumption against bail and suspended sentences for those who commit a serious firearm offence amongst related reforms. While the media has no doubt played a role, our constituents are genuinely concerned about gun crime in our community.

Given the spate of shootings over the last year, particularly those occurring in public places such as the restaurant in O'Connell Street, this concern is understandable. Whilst time will tell, I am hopeful the measures proposed by this bill will see a reduction in offending and the danger to the public it poses. Further, the new offences of shooting at a police officer and of shooting at a premises, commonly known as a 'drive-by', I believe reflect the severity with which the community views such reckless and dangerous conduct and the desire to protect those charged with protecting us.

Whilst I do not plan to move any amendments, I want to record my concern about the trend in this government's bills to remove the requirement for the police to have a reasonable suspicion before searching people—in this case, those on conditional liberty such as on parole—for gunshot residue. I note that this concern is shared by the Law Society. However, I take some solace in the fact that these particular forensic tests are not cheap and that the police will no doubt invoke their right to do these tests on such people with reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed.

Before supporting this bill, I have first made sure that it will be restricted to the criminal element and will not inadvertently capture and penalise legitimate gun owners or users, particularly the farming and sport shooting communities. On the latter, I am aware the bill is supported by the Sport Shooting Association of Australia. On the former, I was somewhat disappointed to learn that the South Australian Farmers Federation did not actively engage in the government consultation, given the potential for its members to be adversely affected. However that said, I am sure that if they had they too would have given the bill their support.

The series of presumptions in the bill, such as the presumption that bail conditions will include a prohibition on possession of a firearm, will not apply if the bail authority is satisfied that the accused has a cogent reason to possess a firearm, such as having a licence and needing it to manage feral species on their property and there is no risk to public safety. As a result, I am clear and convinced that this bill will not result in a farmer losing access to his lawfully possessed and necessary firearm.

As such, I am satisfied that in its attempt to crack down on illegal firearms use the bill has adequate safeguards, but I do concur with the concerns expressed by the Hon. Stephen Wade about the cuts in the police budget, therefore limiting our police in their ability to enforce these laws and do their job well.

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Forests, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Tourism, Minister for the Status of Women) (17:21): I wish to thank honourable members for their second reading contributions, and for the support they are able to offer this important bill. I look forward to the committee stage being dealt with expeditiously.

Bill read a second time.