NZ Arms Bill Second Reading - All Speeches

[00:00:00]Arms bill second reading.

[00:00:03]>> Madam Speaker, the Honorable Nicole McKe.

[00:00:06]>> Madam Speaker, I present a legislative statement on the Arms Bill. That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.

[00:00:15]Honorable Nicole McKe. Madam Speaker, I move that the arms bill now be read a second time. Madam Speaker, at the first reading, I said that public safety and respect for licensed firearm owners is not in conflict, that they actually depend on each other. And the select committee process has reinforced that point. More than 8,000 submissions were made on this bill and that followed almost 8 and a half thousand submissions received during the Ministry of Justice's public consultation in 2025.

[00:00:51]Thousands of licensed firearm owners, firearms businesses, clubs, rangers, hunters, pest controllers, collectors, museums, gunsmiths, and other New Zealanders took the time to engage with this legislation. They read the bill.

[00:01:08]They considered how it would operate in practice. They identified problems, suggested improvements, and shared decades of collective experience.

[00:01:19]They were heard. Many of their suggestions are now reflected in the bill reported back to this house. That is how law should be made with clear heads, proper consultation, and respect for the people who will have to live and work under it. It is a stark contrast to the approach taken after 2019 when Labour rushed through sweeping changes with next to no meaningful consultation, treated licensed firearm owners as though they were the problem, and imposed layer upon layer of regulation that did little to address the real risks. The result is the fragmented, confusing, and often unworkable Arms Act which we have today.

[00:02:10]This bill replaces that mess with a modern, coherent, and enduring regulatory framework. Madam Speaker, I'd like to acknowledge the Justice Select Committee. The committee worked through a large and technically complex bill.

[00:02:27]They considered thousands of submissions and approached the issues constructively across party lines. And I want to acknowledge that every change that has been recommended by the committee was agreed unanimously.

[00:02:41]So I'd like to thank the members of the committee, the officials who supported them and every person who submitted. I want to especially acknowledge the chair, the Honorable Andrew Bailey, who I believe has done an exceptional job.

[00:02:58]His fairminded cheering and willingness to ensure that every member and submitter was properly heard, helping the committee consider the legislation constructively, and we will have a much better law as a result of that. So, I thank him for the considerable time and effort that he has put into this bill.

[00:03:18]And I'd also like to acknowledge the Ministry of Justice officials and also PCO because as I just mentioned, this is a technically complicated bill that they've all had to get their heads around. Madam Speaker, I will now detail some key changes in the bill. The bill as introduced provided an exemption from the requirement to obtain a permit to possess or immediately record a transfer in the firearms registry when a restricted firearm was left with a licensed business such as a gunsmith for repair or for modification.

[00:03:56]That exemption originally applied for 7 days, but submitters told the committee that 7 days was often insufficient where parts needed to be ordered or specialist gun work was required or businesses had existing workloads. The reality is we do not have gunsmiths in every town. In fact, we have very few of them. So their their work program is absolutely huge and often not able to be completed within 7 days. The committee listened and they recommended extending the period from 7 days to 21 days and that madam speaker is a practical change that reduces unnecessary paperwork without weakening public safety. The committee also recommended extending multi-entry visitor licenses from 12 to up to 18 months. This will provide greater flexibility for people who return to New Zealand for annual events such as duck shooting or the roar or even sporting competitions, particularly when the dates of those events do not fall neatly within the same 12 month period. The committee has made important improvements for museums and their employees. As an example, museum worker licenses will now align with the duration of a standard firearms license.

[00:05:18]Museums preserve an important part of New Zealand's military, sporting, technological, and social history. Their staff should be subject to sensible safeguards, but they should not face rules designed for entirely different circumstances.

[00:05:34]The committee also recommended removing the midterm check-in requirements for pest controllers who hold restricted firearm endorsements. Instead, those license holders will be required to notify the regulator when there is a relevant change in their circumstances.

[00:05:52]Other changes will now allow firearms licenses to be temporarily suspended outside of normal business hours when urgent action is necessary, such as situations involving family violence or a risk that someone may harm themselves or another person. The committee has also recommended a clear commencement timetable with most provisions of the bill along with the regulations coming into force on the 23rd of September 2026.

[00:06:22]Other provisions commence progressively as the new regulator and supporting systems are established. The bill will be fully in force by the 23rd of February 2028.

[00:06:35]Madam Speaker, despite the constructiveness on the Justice Committee, it is disappointing that I hear that Labor has chosen to hang its opposition on the bill, partly on the creation of an independent firearms regulator, Firearms Safety and Education New Zealand. The regulator will be independent of police and focused on clear, consistent, efficient, and transparent administration of the licensing system. That separation allows the regulator to focus on licensing, education, on compliance and service while police focus on gangs, criminals and illegally held firearms. The police are an enforcement agency. They investigate crime. They arrest offenders and respond to immediate threats. And those are vital responsibilities.

[00:07:28]This change creates clearer responsibilities, stronger accountability, and greater trust among the people being regulated.

[00:07:38]It is also disappointing that Labour has attempted to build opposition to the bill around pushb button firearms. These firearms are not new. They've been lawfully used in New Zealand for a long time and are completely different from restricted semi-automatic firearms which automatically load the next round after a shot has been fired. Conflating the two may be politically convenient but it is technically wrong. I hope that after hearing thousands of submissions and after all members of the committee did agree unanim unanimously on the recommended improvements that the bill would continue to receive unanimous support and it is regrettable that this may no longer be the case but the government will continue with the work.

[00:08:28]For too long licensed firearm owners have felt that the governments were prepared to talk about them but not actually listen to them. This government has listened. We consulted before the bill was introduced. We invited submissions where a full six-month process was undertaken and their submissions were carefully considered and changes were made as a result. Madam Speaker, farmers, hunters, competitive shooters, and I'll do a shout out here for the New Zealand F-class rifle team who are about to go to Bisley to shoot in the World Championships. Pest controllers, firearms businesses, gunsmiths, clubs, rangers, collectors, museums, and hundreds of thousands of licensed firearm owners contribute to New Zealand's economy, our environment, our communities, and our heritage. Madam Speaker, I again thank every submitter who took the time to share their views and their expertise and I commend this bill to the House. The question is that the motion be agreed to.

[00:09:34]>> Madam Speaker, >> Honorable Jenny Anderson.

[00:09:35]>> Uh thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

[00:09:38]What a long and winding road it has been along the journey of the arms bill. And if we cast our memories back to the beginning of this parliamentary term, we can remember what was promised by Nicole McKe and the ACT party with these reforms. Uh what was promised was the uh deregulation of military-style semi-automatic weapons, those that were prohibited after March 15th in Christ Church, uh for them to be potentially used in um in competitions on on firing ranges. So that was one of the the promises that what this legislation would do. The second promise that was made was to remove the firearms or sort of disestablish the firearms registry to take out a category weapons and to effectively weaken what has been quite an effective tool in registering New Zealand's firearms. Uh and the third one was to remove the firearm safety authority or as it was known to tarp prudiki from um from within police. they were they were the main promises. And so in terms of of delivery on those promises, uh we see that MSSA's those uh prohibited weapons uh continue to be prohibited in New Zealand. And and here in Labour, we commend the National Party on holding your coalition partner to account on keeping those dangerous weapons uh off New Zealand's streets. Uh secondly, uh the firearms registry. Uh even though the minister herself has said that she doesn't trust the firearms registry and she won't be registering her own firearms with them, uh it still continues to be going well and the review undertaken by the minister uh has shown that the firearms registry is working effectively and is an excellent tool for tracking weapons and making sure um that we can keep on top of straw purchasing. It's working very well. So that's a second one that hasn't been completed from the promises. And the third promise was that the firearm safety authority would be removed from police as such as in Canada where it didn't function so well after taking it.

[00:11:32]And and that is where we've seen like a a Clayton's result, a half tick on that one because uh while it's hosted by police, it's not being removed from police. We're having these sort of um pseudo efforts at um giving the effects of removing blue shirts as the minister refers them to or uh authorized police uh constables from having decision-making abilities within this this new entity that's been created by this. Those three main promises, MSSA's uh firearms registry and the FSA being removed from police, none of those have really been delivered upon. Uh and so largely a lot of uh the talk and the posturing around encouraging submissions, engaging with uh the firearms community has been to try and sell what is largely uh not delivering upon the promises that were outlaid uh at the very outset of this parliamentary term. Uh but it's important to note that while um there hasn't been all of those changes that we were fearful of of happening, some of the changes that are contained within this legislation are really concerning for public safety. And so while the minister at the beginning um of her speech framed this up as saying that that public safety and the interests of licensed firearm holders can go hand in hand that the telltale feature of of where there's some conflict there is the role of New Zealand police because us in Labor we believe that the New Zealand police have a fundamental role in making sure that firearms are managed safely and we believe that police uh have a key role in decision- making in understanding uh how safety and public safety around firearms can be managed in New Zealand and primarily because they are on the front line. They are the people that will be the first in many instances to be dealing with firearms in the community whether they be legal or illegal. And so it's very important that uh not only the police association but the police service themselves feel comfortable with the changes that are being made and when they are not comfortable uh madam speaker that is a strong indication that public safety is not at the heart of this bill and that is what I believe. So, I'm going to and to be honest, also I really did think that the police minister would have stepped in and um uh had more of a say around the fact that police officers uh police officers who have office of the constable are being prohibited from having decision-making ability within the newly established um firearm safety authority, which now has a different name. Uh so even though uh there's been a large fail on those three promises, we still have those concerns and I'm going to uh spend the rest of the the the my speech outlaying what those concerns are. The first one is implementation that this bill still has a commencement date of September and and we believe that that's an unrealistic uh date that there is a significant new legislative regime and when we look at the size of this bill it's a big bill and that's happening at the same time as a significant organizational restructure.

[00:14:38]There are key operational risks. We still don't know some of those details.

[00:14:43]We've been asking those questions in committee and some of those details have not yet been spelled out in detail. So what are those processes that are in place to ensure public safety and to make sure that police get intelligent get intelligence real time? We've not been able to uh have a really clear understanding. We know that the interface with um having these kind of I guess ch paper walls uh around the new entity even though it's hosted in police that police don't kind of can't kind of get in there. How is that going to operate if frontline police officers uh are attending a call out where someone has been flagged with a risk of having firearms or being at at risk of being potentially dangerous not only to police officers but to the general public? you know, can we get a guarantee that that intelligence will be available real time to police officers when attending those jobs? Because that's not clear from the questions that we've asked at select committee. And even um Madam Speaker, um the the police themselves have have raised this question about how it will work uh in practice. And it says here under their submission that the um New Zealand Police Association submission it says while independence and licensing decisions is commendable.

[00:16:01]The association is concerned that legislation will create a regulator that is operationally detached from frontline realities. The no blue shirts dictate of the regulator risks a weakening of the direct link between intelligence enforcement and licensing and a slowing down or a complication of information sharing. This is a key risk. So while the minister is stating that this bill is improving public safety around firearms, the police officers are saying no, it's not and that is a cause of concern. They go on to state that any artificial separation of these safety imperatives has the potential to impede public safety rather than enhance it. So where is the police minister on this when police officers themselves are concerned that these changes will reduce public safety around firearms?

[00:16:56]I will just go on to um quote one more section uh Madam Speaker because it's important. It states the proposed structure of the firearms safety authority and the firearms regulator would create a triangular reporting command structure between police, the FSA and the regulators, management and employees. And it is unclear how this will work in practice. So all this is going to be implemented on the 23rd of September. It's a real concern that those details are still not clear and police themselves are also not clear.

[00:17:30]There's another question in terms of implementation and that is what training will need to be undertaken. Police will need training before the regime comes into force. There's also uh what about license holders? What information will be made available as well uh to make sure those people are informed if this is coming into force? Um overall, Madam Speaker, uh the process around this has been really concerning. We know there's been uh quite a bit of public commentary around the minister's appointment process to key advisory groups where we've had members of KFO appointed in there not following due process. We know that the minister has gone on to Facebook and given uh information that was specific to the select committee first to the KFO website on Facebook before members of the public had access to that information. So there was preferential treatment of information being given to closed forums before that was made available.

[00:18:23]>> A point of order, the honorable Nicole McKe. There's an accusation that's just been made that I supplied confidential information to the council of licensed firearm owners. I did not. I would like that retracted. Thank you. There's If you have some proof of that, please table.

[00:18:36]>> Speaking to the point of order, Madam Madam Speaker.

[00:18:39]>> Speaking to the point of orderable Jenny Anderson.

[00:18:42]>> Thank you much, Madam Speaker. I'm happy to provide to the this house an example of where there was information giving detail around the changes to this bill that was before the select committee had reported back to this house and that information was given by the minister on her Facebook page on to KFO and I'm happy to provide that to the house >> and just a second just take some advice.

[00:19:05]Um final um I'll invite the member to complete her uh speech, but we'll have um some information at the end of your speech.

[00:19:35]Just give the clerk some time. Okay.

[00:19:37]Thank you.

[00:19:38]>> Thank you very much. Uh, Madam Speaker, I'd like to conclude by saying that if this really is about public safety, then all New Zealanders deserve to have that information. All New Zealanders at the same time. It's important that we all have trust and confidence that these changes will in fact make New Zealand safer. And so while I am relieved personally that we do not have MSSA's being made more readily available, that we still have a strong and functioning firearms registry, uh, and that police have still housed the firearms uh, safety authority, those changes, those changes in terms of how it will operate, uh, we are concerned that it will significantly weaken what has been a really strong public safety approach from the changes that were put into place post March 17 in New Zealand. So we are really concerned that uh in terms of police officers having realtime intel to be able to respond to firearm safety concerns in New Zealand that this legislation weakens that and we use as a clear example to that the words of the police association themselves who are concerned about this. Uh this has been largely a uh PR exercise for that and we do not commend it to the house. I'm just uh just before I take the next call, I'm going to take some advice uh from the clerks who are writing frantically to get it to me.

[00:21:16]Thank you, Tara. So, basically, it's a it is a matter.

[00:21:24]Yep. Thank you. Um so the the member has uh raised a matter of um of disclosing confidential committee proceedings. Um it is a matter of privilege and there are other channels for raising matters of privilege. So I invite the member to raise it not in a debate but al but through um the appropriate process.

[00:21:52]Okay.

[00:21:54]Madam Chair, >> Scott Willis.

[00:21:55]>> Thank you, Madam Chair. And uh I would like to speak to this bill and also mention the good work as the minister has of the justice select committee and thank the 8,000 plus submitters who really did participate thoroughly in this bill and expressed a range a great diversity of opinion but were very very helpful in helping us work through where we think this bill or how this bill should should shape up.

[00:22:29]And I'm very pleased, as my colleague has just mentioned, to see that the arms registry is retained.

[00:22:36]And of course, after 40 years with lots of amendments, the Arms Act did need did need updating.

[00:22:46]But, Madame Chair, we also have to consider what we would do if we had the majority and if we were able to make the the changes that we want. And for that reason, we have expressed our opposition to the establishment to this bill because of the establishment of a secretary statutory regulator separate from the police, not no sworn police officers. That's essentially the problem we see with this bill. And and I think it expresses the danger of the minister listening to a small small lobby groups essentially because unless the minister in question is a is a member of such lobby groups like the council of licensed firearm owners which represents less than 5% of the 2,200 licensed firearm owners or or other groups like Kiwi Gun Blog lovely people who have referred to me as a a um small dick tree hugger. They they this this um madam madam speaker is something that I think we really don't need. We don't need that type of um discussion in the in the in the in in this for such serious legislation.

[00:24:07]Madam Speaker, >> thank you Madam Speaker. I'm simply quoting from but um >> um you didn't say it was a quote.

[00:24:19]>> My my my apologies. It was a quote, Madam Speaker. Um Madam Speaker, I've been a licensed gun over owner for about 40 years. I'm trying to remember whether it's more or slightly less. I think it's just more a little bit. And I I remember buying a rifle on TradeMe quite some years ago. And it got delivered to my property, to my home. No one was home at the time. and it was dropped at the back door.

[00:24:47]And I was quite surprised. I was obviously pleased that the rifle that I had purchased had been delivered, but it had been left at my back door where anyone walking past could have picked it up and walked off with it.

[00:25:03]And I reflected at that point that nobody knew what firearms I had.

[00:25:10]I reflected that if it's that easy for firearms to be delivered, how on earth are we knowing what's happening in our community?

[00:25:21]So, personally, I was very pleased when the gun registry was developed. How crazy has it been that for so long we have not known what firearms are out there in the community. And that gives me great comfort to know for people for for the firearms registry to know what firearms I have, but for most firearms to be known and to be documented.

[00:25:51]And yet and yet, Madam Speaker, we have had the success of the firearms registry. We've had Hugh Dero Mack from the um Council of Licensed Firearm Owners saying that KFO members do not trust the police and that's why an independent statutory regulator is needed that excludes the police.

[00:26:14]I'm a licensed firearm owner. I trust the police and I I am disturbed to see organizations that represent such a small proportion of licensed firearm owners having such a big impact on our legislation.

[00:26:37]>> Clearly, there are small groups of licensed firearm owners who distrust the police.

[00:26:43]Council of Licensed Firearm Owners are that small group. Perhaps the people who belong to the Kiwi gun blog are that group. And we know that social media can amplify niche perspectives or groups can be mouthpieces for niche concerns.

[00:27:04]They might not represent a do a a great um a large perspective of views, but they certainly seem to have driven policy. And the thing is, Madam Speaker, we know that the National Rifle Association in the US uses very similar tactics, very similar tactics to boost gun sales, but also to fight any restrictions on gun ownership.

[00:27:30]>> Can you come back to this bill, Mr. Willis, please.

[00:27:34]>> Yes, certainly Madam Speaker, because um what I would what I would like what I would like to talk about is the the situation we find ourselves in. Let's see. We've had we we've had um the the Council of Licensed Firearm Owners talking about the declining trust and confidence within the community. Police are very rapidly declining trust and confidence within the community. are supposed to be regulating since 2019 when they stopped looking at licensed firearm owners as law-abiding people and started viewing us as potential criminals. And I've accused the police of having standover and bullying tact tactics. Madam Speaker, New Zealand Police Association were opposed to the creation of a regulator that is operationally detached from frontline realities.

[00:28:27]And if I could quote from their submission, Madam Speaker, they said, "We don't want this legislation will create a regulator that is operationally detached from frontline realities. The no blue shirts dictate for the regulator risks, weakening of the direct link between intelligence, enforcement, and licensing and a slowing down or complication of information sharing."

[00:28:54]And Madam Speaker, I think that point's really, really important. If we are thinking about safety, if we're thinking about how we keep our communities safe, that's what is at the heart of our opposition to this bill because it is clear that if we are taking the responsibility outside of the police, we're taking away that that relationship. We are ensuring there are no blue shirts, there are there's no sworn police officers part of it. We're breaking that link that allowed information sharing and allow allowed the clear intelligence to flow and I am particularly concerned with that madam speaker. So our opposition largely is in respect to that component. We are also concerned, Madam Speaker, with the cost, the additional cost that this is imposing for the the setup of a of a new regulator outside of the police.

[00:29:56]Something like 45 million with additional contingency and we don't know how much for some information technology changes. That is part of doing something that we see is completely unnecessary and will not increase safety and may well decrease community safety.

[00:30:17]So, we've had um let's see a a a concern expressed during the submissions that intelligence sharing relying on those informal relationships, they'll be weakened through the setup of a new organization.

[00:30:37]And Madam Speaker, we've also heard that this is all going to be done by the 23rd of September this year. It looks as though it's completely unrealistic, Madam Speaker. So, our concern is really about the way in which this legislation, although we're quite happy with where we've with many of the changes that have happened and we're we're certainly pleased to see some of the more extreme elements have been taken out. As my colleague has referred to, we are concerned that a small group of people have been able to drive legislation and drive one particular part of legislation which will not increase safety in our community and will lead to a a an increase in insecurity. And that is why we are opposed to this bill as it sits now, Madam Speaker. But we do think despite 40 years of the original bill and many amendments, when this bill passes, there will be amendments and we will see further change and we will see a return to the police of a regulator to make sure that our communities can be kept safe. So, Madam Speaker, thank you for um managing our way through this bill and uh I just simply want to >> time has expired. Katherine Wed.

[00:32:07]>> Madam Speaker, look, I rise to support this bill because this bill is about ensuring responsible ownership of firearms while strengthening public safety. And this bill will keep firearms out of criminals hands, which is a very positive thing. And I was really interested in the gang membership clauses uh that ensure that uh gang membership is an automatic disqualifying factor for holding a firearms license, which will keep our communities safer.

[00:32:41]But it also making compliance easier for licensed responsible firearms owners.

[00:32:47]And as we've heard already, we have a lot of responsible firearms license holders from our hunters, from our pest controllers and our professional shooters. And so this is about modernizing uh the regulatory system. So I commend this bill to the house.

[00:33:05]>> The honorable Casey Costello. Madam Speaker, I rise on behalf of New Zealand first to speak on the arms bill. If you can indulge me for one moment, I would like to absolutely applaud that the uh Green Party is advocating for the rights of the police and their trust in them, which is incredible given that one of their members believes it's like walking down the street with a gang member than a police officer. So, um it's encouraging that they now have great faith in the police and maybe they won't keep advocating for defunding them. Um back to the bill, Madam Speaker, is um Firstly, it was with, you know, I applaud um the minister for the hard work in advocating quite con conversely to what the um the other side of the house has said broadly with New Zealanders um has had a very open door policy, a very robust select committee process and engaged broadly um with all of those that are impacted by this legislation. Uh this is a complex bill.

[00:34:07]There is no doubt about it. It is complex because it deals with a range of things including um the use carriage and the licensing of firearms. Um shifting the firearms into a um authority um over a managed process unlike has been alluded to in the house that this is going to occur on the in September this year. It is a managed process and it is complex. The investment that needs to be made into this program of work would have need to be made whether there was continuing within the police environment or under a new authority. This is a practical legislation that is managing public safety at its core and ensuring that all of those who use firearms for a range of reasons um have the legal protections to do so within the realms of the law. And those that who who do not comply with the law or have any illegal intentions will be better managed through a proper legislation that has clarified the clauses that has made it easier to manage and navigate, easier to prosecute criminals and absolutely greater visibility over who owns firearms. It is a positive step forward around a piece of legislation that has long been overdue for reform.

[00:35:27]It is an effective piece of legislation that will continue to ensure public safety is at its core while respecting those lawful gun owners and enabling them to have possession of firearms to do the recreational and sport activity that comes with that and work that relates to those firearms legislation uh firearms activity. Um it is a positive step forward for this government. It has been a massive piece of work. I applaud the select committee on the effort that they did to ensure that the amendments were put forward and I commend the bill to the house.

[00:36:03]>> Uh this is a split call. I call Lawrence Sunsan.

[00:36:06]>> Uh thank you Madam Speaker. As we heard from my colleague Scott Willis that the Green Party does not support this bill.

[00:36:13]Um but I do want to acknowledge the work that the justice select committee did on this particular bill as I was working through as uh members have seen from the commentary of this bill that while um the greens opposes this bill that we do support some of the amendments that have been uh adopted by the select committee that overall improves the bill. I also want to acknowledge uh my colleague Scott Willis um for shephering through this bill through the select committee process on behalf of the Green Party as our um as probably one of our only members who have himself experience with firearms as a firearm um licensed holder. Now as members of this house would know that I am more old school um firearms is not for me. I prefer bow and arrow recurve not compound. Thank you.

[00:37:04]Um, so that's but there are a couple things that I want to address in terms of uh this bill and I think you know the first one as my colleague Scott Willis mentioned is around the concerns of the role of the police within this particular organization. I hear the previous speaker in terms of the fact that the Greens is seems to be loving and hating police at the same time but at the same time I would say to the same to their political party that they seem to be loving India and hating India at the same time. So you know I think uh politics is complex and I think what how we feel about a particular um agency and the work that agency do is also complex.

[00:37:42]Um but in terms of this the role of the police is concerning that they are going to be under this new independent regulator that there will be no sworn um police officers from here and I do want to reiterate the police association's concern around the fact that you know this the legislation creates a potential for weakening of connections between intelligence enforcement and licensing by excluding swarm police officers from the regulatory agency. Now this is quite important later on that I want to mention on why that potentially can be quite crucial um when we're looking at checks and balances. However, I am um pleased to see that the fact that um through the select stages, additional clauses have been added in that does allow for some of that checks and balances particularly around the role of IPCA and MOJ when it comes to um this idea of scrutiny I believe of the um uh the regulator in this case. Um I think that is an important move. uh yes the application of the independent police conduct authority um when it comes to uh the chief executive while noting that while the employees are employees of the New Zealand police the chief executive isn't part of the screening process as I think it does help providing some consistency to the this to the overall purpose and principles of this bill and that's important to see now I did mention that it does create an interesting sort of I guess bureaucratic bureaucratic conundrum where on one hand we have an independent um regulator but the other hand we still have title puri the firearm safety authority and also the registry I believe sits under the police. So whether this is actually going to have then the intended effect of allowing for that communication across uh various groups is something that we will just have to see um once this is um implemented. However, like we said, you know, we do have some concerns um at this stage bill as drafted. So, you know, we will have further questions for the minister during the committee stage, I'm sure. And I think the other concern that we have is around some of the definition. And again, this is something that was addressed through the colle uh through the select committee. And this is something that as a part of the regulation review committee that we have concerns over the way that the uh definition for restricted firearms could be set under regulations and particularly we're looking at things like semi-automatic automatic rifle. And there is just a new clause has been added um clause 364A which also just want to kind of uh close that loop of consultation etc with the police and with the relevant organizations and over here I want to mention that the reason we did see quite quick quite sudden changes is because the way that we're looking at ever fractured um society and the way that we look at the aftermath of the Christ Church massacre it is important for us to remember that that there are actual families who are affected by all of this. Particularly, I'm looking at the ethnic communities and the is um the Muslim communities who have been affected by some of these. So I think it's important that any changes we do see and I'm hoping that clause 364 will be cover a will cover that is consultation with ethnic communities and um those communities have been previously affected. So we don't support this but we are interested in engaging further during the select uh during the committee stage. Thank you Mr. Speaker >> Rakari Neman.

[00:41:12]>> Mr. Speaker, look, I'm really pleased to see uh some of these really pragmatic changes and something that we've been talking about for quite a few years now.

[00:41:18]Uh there are some amazing local clubs that really um have the best interests of of everyone in their community of mind. Um they're not criminals. And to have this moved away from the police, as we've talked about for a really long time, uh makes that step to identify that they are doing the right thing. Um and that those that aren't can then be policed accordingly. uh and not having the treatment of all people that have firearms license as criminals is really important. So with that, I commend the bill to the house.

[00:41:45]>> Uh uh point of order um Nicole honorable Nicole McKe.

[00:41:51]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the member Jenny Anderson has made false claims about me in this house that she has been unable to substantiate. It has by the previous speaker rightly suggested that if she has concerns relating to a matter of privilege, there is a process for raising those. But as it stands, those remarks have not been withdrawn in this house. And my question is, and I'm just seeking your guidance, what is my recourse um if she does not take up the process that had been suggested? Um where do I actually get the chance to be able to defend myself?

[00:42:29]uh and are we are able to get an undertaking from that member that she will either commit to making a formal complaint or withdraw the comments that she's made. My concern is that there is no evidence for what she's suggesting and I suspect she's not going to make a complaint because she can't back it up.

[00:42:46]just uh >> if the people would like to hear a response on the record, but you know the other way to desert serious accusation to make.

[00:43:17]It's not one that should be made because of privilege and there are other mechan um right now what you've already the previous speaker has already made a um made a ruling about where this should be dealt with and I'm aware of that. And what I don't intend to do is to allow this to be a debate take place here. Um and I'll what the remedy suggested by the previous speaker will stand. Um if in answer now the point of order I've made that ruling but the point of order as long as it's not contradicting anything that I'm saying and as long as it's not a continuation of the >> or Okay. So um you've heard the you've heard the previous speaker who's invited the remedy um and other than that it is a debating point >> as it stands right um Dan Rose >> speaker um I rise to speak on the second reading of the arms bill. Now Labour supports responsible firearms ownership.

[00:44:32]We know that many New Zealanders use firearms lawfully and responsibly for hunting, pest control, sport shooting, collecting, and recreation. Now, most license holders do the right thing. They take their responsibilities seriously and understand that firearms must be treated with care and respect, but public safety must always come first.

[00:44:55]And that has been the New Zealand approach for a long time. Firearms ownership in this country is a privilege, not a right. It comes with responsibilities. It comes with obligations. And it comes with the expectation that Parliament will keep the law up to date when risks change or new technologies emerge. Labor's differing view makes that point clearly.

[00:45:18]Firearms regulation must prioritize public safety and the licensing system has to reflect that principle. One of the things that concerns me about this bill is that there is a bit of a second amendment style nonsense creeping into the debate. That is not the New Zealand way. And we have to be right that there is a constit there's not a constitutional right to possess firearms. And we do not start from the position that every safeguard is an attack on liberty. We start from a much more practical Kiwi position. If you want to own firearms, you need to show that you are a fit and proper person.

[00:45:56]You need to follow the rules and the public has a right to expect that the system is safe. That does not mean treating lawful firearms owners as the enemy. It does not mean ignoring the needs of farmers, hunters, pest controllers, clubs, collectors, and sporting shooters. But it does mean being honest about the risk. Firearms are not ordinary consumer goods. They are lethal weapons. In the right hands, used properly, they can be managed safely. In the wrong hands, or under weak rules, the consequences can be devastating.

[00:46:31]I say that as someone who's spent a fair bit of my life around firearms. I've used them professionally and I've trained with them and I've carried them in environments where safety, discipline, and judgment matter. That experience has left me with a pretty simple view. Good firearms regulations is not about punishing responsible people. It is about making sure we identify the risks early and deal with them before they become bigger problems.

[00:46:58]And that is why I've taken a close interest in this bill. I've not come to this debate with slogans. I've done the work. I've looked into other jurisdictions and I've lo lodged a long list of written parliamentary questions because I wanted to know what is actually happening in the New Zealand firearms market particularly around the changing style of firearms entering New Zealand. One area that I've been looking at closely is the push button center fire rifles. These are firearms that appear to sit in a regulatory gap. They are not traditional boltaction rifles.

[00:47:33]They can automatically eject a spent cartridge using gas operation or a similar self ejecting mechanism and then require the user to only uh activate a button, lever release, or similar control to chamber the next round.

[00:47:50]Labour differing Labour's differing view notes that while they may not be captured by the bill's definition of a semi-automatic firearm, their practical capability and rate of fire can be comparable. That matters because the law should look at the practical risk, not just technical labels. If a firearm functions in a way that gets very close to the practical capability of a restricted semi-automatic center fire rifle, then we should be prepared to ask whether it should be subject to similar controls. That is not anti- firearms.

[00:48:26]That's basic public safety. After the Bondi shooting, New South Wales government passed the Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025.

[00:48:38]It removed push button rifles from the standard category A license and moved them into the category C which is described in the legislation as being prohibited except for limited purposes.

[00:48:50]Now I want to be clear that the Bondi government did not use a range or an all core push button 223 but the reforms show that policy makers across the tasine were prepared to take a closer look at this emerging class of fire for firearm. In my view, there is value in learning from that experience while we are shaping this arms bill. The answers I received to my written parliamentary questions do concern me. Import permits have been issued for push button rifles capable of accepting the Sten Egg 4179 or AR-15 pattern detachable magazines, including the All Core 223 push button and the Ranger push button rifle. For example, the government has confirmed that 81 223 caliber ranger push button rifles were imported into New Zealand between 1 January 2023 and 14 June 2026.

[00:49:47]Those imports were associated with two used import permits with one firearm imported in 2025 and 80 imported this year as at 14 June. Now, 81 firearms is not a large number compared with the overall firearms market, and I'm not suggesting that people who lawfully own these firearms are doing anything wrong.

[00:50:11]But what it does show is that this type of firearm is beginning to establish a presence in New Zealand. These firearms automatically eject the spent cartridge after firing and require only the activation of a button or release mechanism to chamber the next round.

[00:50:28]While they sit out of the current definition of a semi-automatic firearm, they have operating characteristics that should make the government stop and take a closer look. When Parliament restricted semi or militarystyle semi-automatic firearms, it should not have surprised anyone that manufacturers looked for alternatives. That is what happens when regulations change. One pathway closes and another one opens. My concern is that push button center fire rifles may become that alternative pathway. We already have evidence that these firearms are entering New Zealand.

[00:51:04]We have legitimate questions about how they operate. We have legislation before parliament right now. This is the moment to deal with the issue, not kick it down the road. If we can see that gap today, why would we wait for a future ordering council, a future government or a future buyback program funded by taxpayers when we could deal with it now? That is why I'm I've proposed an amendment to clause nine. My amendment would classify certain push style or push button style center fire firearms as restricted firearms where they use gas operation or another self- ejecting mechanism to automatically extract or eject a fired cartridge case and require only the activation of a button lever release or similar control to chamber the next round from a magazine. The purpose of that amendment is straightforward. It would ensure that firearms with substantially similar practical rate of fire and operating characteristics to restricted semi-automatic center fire rifles are subject to the same kind of regulatory controls. This is not radical, it's practical. It says that if the risk profile is similar, the controls should be similar. It says parliament should not always be one step behind emerging firearm technology. It says that we should not be reactive when we have the chance to be proactive.

[00:52:29]Emerging firearm platforms is one side of the public safety equation. The other is making sure that people who hold fire alarm firearm licenses remain suitable to do so. Now, quickly, the second area I think the bill falls short is the fit and proper person test. For me, this is central to the whole firearms system. A firearms license is not just a piece of paper. It's the state saying a person can be trusted to possess firearms safely. That is a serious judgment and it should be made carefully and it should be clearly grounded in public safety. Again, this comes back to the principle that firearm ownership is a privilege and not a right. If someone wants to hold a firearms license, the burden should be on them to meet the standard. That is not unfair. It is basic a basic requirement that should sit underneath a responsible firearms licensing system. And I'm also concerned that the law needs to do better to reflect the world that we live in now.

[00:53:29]Radicalization and extremist behavior do not always happen in obvious places.

[00:53:34]They do not always happen in public meetings or in formal organizations.

[00:53:38]Increasingly, they happen online. Now, a few months ago, I posted on social media about my concerns regarding push button rifles. Their response included vitrial abuse and extremist commentary to such an extent that I removed the post and sought advice from parliamentary security. I took the post down because I did not want it becoming a platform for online hate. And if any of the individuals posting that material happen to be firearms license holders, then in my view that should raise serious questions about whether they remain a fit and proper person to possess firearms. So that cons that that that online activity u and that participation in that online activity is cause for concern that we need to address in this bill. So uh therefore, Mr. Speaker, have huge concerns and this is an opportunity to put it right. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[00:54:31]Mr. >> Speaker, >> uh Dr. Vanessa Winnick.

[00:54:33]>> Uh thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is an honor to speak in the second reading of the arms bill. As a um doctor at the time of the um Christ Church shootings, I did have um patients from our practice who were killed and their families affected. However, my family are also um owners of firearms and um I understand the perspective of um people who are uh very um law-abiding citizens who have felt targeted because of their ownership of firearms. And therefore, I think this bill has created a strong and balanced um compromise. And I commend the bill to the house. Mr. Chair, >> uh this is a five minute split call. Dr. Duncan Webb.

[00:55:18]>> Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. Um this is a bit of two halves in some ways. Um because uh as the minister in her speech observed um the committee worked uh pretty cooperatively to just make the rules around arms workable for things like um museum curators and overseas visitors and uh and things like that, including um rules around when a license is suspended or um when a firearm is uplifted from a premise. uh and there was some really useful discussions both uh around balancing for example um the risk of uh a firearm and the uh you know essentially the inconvenience of the rule. So a good example that the minister referred to was uh the length of time that a firearm can be left at a gunsmith without having to um identify its precise location on the register. Uh and obviously um there are situations where it takes a fair length of time to get parts for a rifle or to uh just do do the necessary work.

[00:56:30]And so the 7-day period was thought to be a little um unrealistic. Uh and also recognizing that a gunsmith is a you know a trusted person person who's got a higher level of um kind of had a higher level of scrutiny than just an ordinary uh firearms license holder. Uh and so that that length of time um was pushed out uh to 30 days I think it was um from memory.

[00:56:56]The other half of the bill though is um this idea that we need to uh sever the relationship um of firearms regulation from the role of policing. Uh and our concern around this bill is that uh firearms are used throughout criminal networks.

[00:57:25]Um, and there is a gray area. It's just not the case that every person who is a licensed firearms owner is good and every person who doesn't who has a firearm um and doesn't have a license um is is problematic. Second half's true, but in the first half there is clearly a a a class of people and the police are onto it >> [snorts] >> um that are uh assisting um criminal elements to obtain firearms.

[00:57:59]And even apart from that, it's critical that the police can have ready access to information when they're attending a premises or an incident to know the likelihood that firearms will be present. And that's a critical part of it. And it's not clear to us and we we could not be assured that under the proposed system this would be the case.

[00:58:24]So we consider that uh the move uh to create an agency albeit within police but without but without um commissioned police sworn police having a functional role within the organization we don't think it's a good move and we also uh we don't think it's good value either because uh it's going to cost many tens of millions of dollars I think the estimates are over $50 million over four years to transfer this function into uh this new organization which seems to be mainly a kind of doctrine approach rather one one of pragmatics. So we do have concerns I must say without uh being too flattering it was very good to have Dan Rose on the committee because he does have a comprehensive knowledge um of firearms um and he was able to inform the committee uh and and his colleagues very well on these matters and his concerns around push button firearms are real. These are firearms which uh discharge the cartridge automatically and use the cach the gas generated by the discharge to kind of preload uh the next cartridge and you simply press a button which on some versions of this is on the stock. So, it's pull the trigger, press a button, shoot, pull the, you know, and so you can imagine, and you only have to go to YouTube to have a look and see how rapidly these um these rifles can fire.

[00:59:51]And in fact, there was one YouTube clip I looked at where they were glowingly saying how they had uh shot off 2,000 rounds in a couple of hours. Now, that's not something I'd be particularly proud of. uh it suggests that the speed of fire is the main thing there and we know that this house bar in one vote bans semi-automatic weapons. So I think we do need to keep a close eye on push button um firearms. So that's why we're not supporting this bill. Mr. >> Speaker Miles Anderson.

[01:00:21]>> Thank you Mr. Speaker. I rise to speak on the arms bill in the second reading and amongst many provisions in this bill. I'm really pleased to see that there are improvements for specialist users including dealers, pest controllers, gunsmiths, collectors, museums, and other businesses that there has been a lot of commentary around that in this community um when the changes came through in 2019. So, I'm pleased to see those changes uh being made and I commend this bill to the house.

[01:00:52]>> Speaker, >> uh Georgie Danzy.

[01:00:54]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um I rise to take a call on the arms bill. I wanted to start um my contribution just to speak just to speak to the minister's comments um at the beginning of her statement around the banning of militarystyle semi-automatic weapons.

[01:01:15]And the minister talked about that legislation being rushed through parliament and there being messy changes. Um, and I think I want to speak to that because I wasn't in parliament at the time, but I watched like most of the New Zealand public to see how this parliament would respond to uh the devastating attack in Christ Church. And what I saw was a government acting decisively to ban an incredibly dangerous weapon. um after that terrorist attack. Um I'll also note that every single member of that parliament voted in favor of the changes to protect our communities apart from one Thank you, Minister. Yes, I was getting there.

[01:02:07]one person. [laughter] And I think this speaks to >> the real concern that Labor has with this bill. Um, which is that the changes were made to protect all New Zealanders and the protection of New Zealanders and the safety of New Zealanders should be at the forefront of everything we do in parliament. Um, other speakers have spoken to the concerns that we have around this bill. Um, I'm really really pleased to see that although the ACT party um campaigned on deregulator deregulating military-style semi-automatic weapons, they were not successful in that. I'm very pleased that National was able to put their foot down about something in the coalition.

[01:03:00]um and uh not agree to pro to progress that part of this bill because we know how dangerous those weapons are. Um so it's very pleasing to see that ACT has failed to deliver on that promise they made to to gun lobby groups in that space. Uh today I wanted to talk about three aspects of the arms bill and why uh Labor is opposing this bill. Um, other speakers have spoken to the real concerns raised by frontline police. And I think in a for a bill like this when we have our our police officers on the front line every single day uh dealing with um firearms in our communities, whether they are licensed or unlicensed firearms, we need to take their opinion and their expertise very very seriously.

[01:03:58]And so it's unfortunate that despite the view of frontline police during the select committee process, um the government has chosen to ignore them. It's interesting because we hear the Minister for Police Mark Mitchell constantly talk about how much he appreciates the police. Yet in this bill, the police the expertise of the police have not been prioritized.

[01:04:28]So the three things that I wanted to discuss today uh was the firearms authority. Uh the speakers have spoken to that and I wanted to elaborate a little bit on that. The push button center fire rifles and the fit and proper person provisions.

[01:04:46]So I'll start with the firearm arms authority. Um, Labour's position is that this authority should stay with the police. Um, as as mentioned and as we all know, our police do an incredible job for public safety in our communities every single day. Uh, and their expertise in this matter uh should be put at the forefront of decision making. So, I wanted to speak specifically to the no blue shirts rule.

[01:05:18]So this rule for the uh listeners at home means that sworn police officers are prohibited from being employed by or involved in the new firearms regulatory agency.

[01:05:32]Um and the the issue we have there is that if we're not involving our police officers in these processes and in the regulatory a agency uh this will weaken the intelligence gathering the enforcement and the licensing of this uh agency and it removes decision making authorities and removes that uh influence and decision making from from the police. So, under the arms bill, licensing is handled by a civilian staff led by an independent chief executive who reports directly to the firearms minister.

[01:06:13]And as I mentioned, if the if the Minister of Police cares so deeply about police and their expertise and the value that they bring to our country, then my question is why are they being left out of the regulatory agency? Because leaving police out of this agency brings a major weakness to this bill. um it means that our communities won't be as safe. We know that police have the insight from working on the front line every single day. Uh and that insight is so valuable to us as a country that having them as part of the agency, the regulatory agency uh is an important part of that.

[01:07:02]Um so while the regulator regulator is intended to operate independently and will not employ sworn officers, it will continue to rely on police for certain corporate services.

[01:07:16]We are, Mr. Speaker, not convinced that this hybrid arrangement will work. Um, and we're not convinced that it serves the best interests of public safety or the public. Um, look, other speakers have spoken to this bill coming to into effect on the 23rd of September, which is I'm not wearing a watch, but if I was, it's about a month away, I think. Um, which two months. Two months. Um, but the point I'm making is not that I'm not wearing a watch, but that it's not a lot of time. And thank you. That doesn't tell the time.

[01:07:58]Um, the um the point that I'm making is that um what point am I making? The point I'm making [laughter] is that there isn't a lot of time uh in order to get this up and running and ready for the 23rd of September. And that's where our concerns are that if there's this hybrid relationship um arrangement where the police aren't sitting on the uh regulatory agency but are have other requirements of them. Are the police going to be up and ready to go with the new agency on the 23rd of September? um h will they have the training required uh to implement new processes and the lack of detail around that specific issue is where I have a number of questions uh just to ensure that everyone is prepared for this process. I I am concerned that the bureaucracy of this will balloon out of hand. Um and so I have further questions around what how will bureauxy be reduced and managed during this process uh with the new regulator.

[01:09:13]Um the second uh point that I wanted to mention and my colleague Dan Rosewan has uh spoken to this is the push button center fire rifles. Um so we labor remains concerned about a regulatory gap relating to push button uh center fire rifles. Um so these are self- ejecting gas operated firearms and require only a manual bolt release between shots. Um and and we acknowledge that they are not captured by the bill's definition of a semi-automatic firearm, but they deliver a rate of fire and functionality uh that is in practical terms comparable uh to semi uh semi-automatic weapons. And so given the purpose of the bill is to promote safe possession and prevent misuse of firearms, uh I think there's really uh a big gap here in and what could have been and should have been considered in the changes made as part of this legislation.

[01:10:26]So to summarize uh overall the voice of frontline police were very clear in saying that there are major weaknesses in the bill. Um police are sitting at the front line yet their voice is being taken away, their expertise is being taken away in the processing um of the regulatory agency and Labour opposes the bill.

[01:10:58]>> The question is that the motion be agreed to. Those of that opinion will say I.

[01:11:03]>> To the contrary, no. The eyes have it.

[01:11:07]>> Party vote is called for. Please conduct a party vote.

[01:11:10]>> New Zealand National >> 48 in favor.

[01:11:13]>> New Zealand Labor.

[01:11:20]>> Green Party of Alaro New Zealand.

[01:11:22]>> Doma act. New Zealand.

[01:11:28]>> 11 votes in favor.

[01:11:30]>> New Zealand. First, >> eight votes in favor.

[01:11:36]Fak Ferris Mario.

[01:11:54]The eyes are 67, the nose are 55. The question is agreed.