Mr. Love questions the Minister for Police about the public release of firearm owner locations, citing privacy concerns. The Minister defends the de-identification process and questions the intent behind the inquiry, linking it to broader firearms regulation debates.

AnsweredQoN 176Legislative Assembly
Asked
23 March 2022
Portfolio
Police

QuestionView source ↗

POLICE — FIREARM OWNERSHIP
176. Mr R.S. LOVE to the Minister for Police:
I have a supplementary question.
Does the minister think it is a good idea to publicly publish the locations of
those firearms owners, given that some of them have been able to successfully
identify their own addresses through the published information?
Dr D.J. Honey interjected.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Leader
of the Liberal Party!

AnswerView source ↗

Thank you, member, for the
opportunity to revisit the subject. It is impossible to identify specific
residences from a big blob on a de-identified map.
Several members interjected.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Members!
Mr P. PAPALIA : I am
providing the member with the information that was provided by Western Australia
police, who provided this information. They de-identified it. One cannot
identify individual residences. That aside, the whole point of this matter is that every single suburb in metropolitan
Perth looks exactly like that. The question I have for the member is:
What is the intent of his pursuit of this question? Is he suggesting that the —
Dr D.J. Honey interjected.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Leader
of the Liberal Party!
Mr P. PAPALIA : Is he suggesting
that the 60 per cent rise in firearms in 13 years —
Mr R.S. Love interjected.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Deputy
Leader of the Opposition, you have asked a question. Let the minister respond.
Mr P. PAPALIA : Is he
suggesting that a 60 per cent rise in firearms in Western Australia in 13 years
is something that should not be considered? Is he suggesting that the
recommendation —
Mr R.S. Love interjected.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Deputy
Leader of the Opposition!
Mr P. PAPALIA : Recommendation
2.1 of the Australian Law Reform Commission report of October 2016,
commissioned by his government, states —
The Firearms Legislation should be
redrafted from the ground up and be re-enacted.
Is the member suggesting that that
should be ignored? Is he suggesting that the National Firearms Agreement —
Several members interjected.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Members
of the opposition!
Mr P. PAPALIA : Is the
member suggesting that we should ignore the principles of the National Firearms
Agreement , which states in paragraph 4, ''Provision to maintain
fundamental aspects of the National Firearms Agreement'', that all
agreeing governments —

will periodically consider emerging issues relating to this Agreement,
including, for example, improvements and advancements in firearm
technologies. Issues for consideration will be those which will ensure that the
Agreement remains true to its fundamental aspects, being: the requirement for a
genuine reason for possessing or using a firearm, the appropriate
categorisation of firearms, the registration of firearms, firearms licensing —
The DEPUTY SPEAKER :
Minister, we have a point of order.
Point of Order
Mr R.S.
LOVE : My question was quite specifically aimed at understanding the
publication of the map, not about the Australian Law Reform Commission report.
The
DEPUTY SPEAKER : Deputy Leader of the Opposition, there is —
Mr P. Papalia interjected.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER :
Minister, just wait! Deputy Leader of the Opposition, there is no point of
order. The minister is responding to your question. Carry on, minister.
Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr P. PAPALIA : That is
right. The provision continues —
� the registration of firearms,
firearms licensing (including fit and proper person requirements), the
requirement for a permit to acquire each firearm, the safe and secure storage
of firearms, the recording of firearms sales, and suitable firearms transaction
practices.
Several members interjected.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Deputy
leader! Members!
Mr P. PAPALIA : Is the member
suggesting that the National Firearms Agreement, which, in my opinion, is the
most significant contribution to Australian society by former Prime Minister
John Howard, should be ignored? Because that is the nature of his question. He
indicates by the nature of his question that he does not support —
Ms M.J. Davies interjected.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Leader
of the Opposition!
Mr P. PAPALIA : —
compliance with the National Firearms Agreement. It is actually concerning.
Mr R.S. Love interjected.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Deputy
leader!
Mr P. PAPALIA : I notice the
member for North West Central is not here, Leader of the Opposition, but you
need to consider where you stand on legislation and reform of the Firearms Act —
Several members interjected.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Members
of the opposition!
Mr P. PAPALIA : —
because it is coming. There is going to be a rewrite of the Firearms Act. We
announced yesterday a process.
Ms M.J. Davies interjected.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Leader
of the Opposition!
Mr P. PAPALIA : We announced
yesterday a process. It has commenced. There will be a lot of consultation. The drafting will take place over the next 18
months and we look forward to delivering proper, new, appropriate legislation in accordance with the National Firearms Agreement and the Australian Law
Reform Commission report at the end of next year.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more