Rurawhe AdrianHon RON MARK (Minister of Defence): Thank you Mr Speaker. I rise to take a call on behalf of the caucus of New Zealand First and to express their views as we move this legislation through the third reading. I guess possibly the last week has been somewhat sobering for a number of reasons. There is no secret; we've had many conversations in the media and with Minister Nash and with the Labour team around some of our reservations with respect to this bill. New Zealand First formed a coalition Government and selected the Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern to be the Prime Minister of this nation and she was the Prime Minister of this nation when that horrendous attack by that terrorist took place in Christchurch on 15 March. As the Prime Minister of this nation she made a call. It was a loud and clear and very emphatic call.As responsible parties and members of this coalition Government New Zealand First supports our Prime Minister and continues to do so. There are many occasions when I know commentators in the media and commentators around this country politically motivated or whatever have chosen to accuse New Zealand First of not being responsible not capable of participating in a stable coalition Government. They often hark back to 1998 and the dissolution of the coalition Government. Actually that wasn't our doing; that was Jenny Shipley's doing and a whole band of turncoats inside her party who tipped that Government up. But none the less the accusations still keep getting levelled at New Zealand First. New Zealand First means to continue to support the Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern as the Prime Minister of this nation and this Government. That's not to say that we don't have a different view in all cases to the Labour Party.New Zealand First has had many conversations around this piece of legislation and has attempted to get some changes. We believe at this point in time we have struck a balance that will reopen the conversation around this Act. I know that some people want to celebrate and wave a flag and say that they have won a battle that they've been fighting for some time. Rightly or wrongly they have certain views about firearms owners. I know a lot of firearms owners who I respect as law-abiding citizens of this nation who just want to go about enjoying their chosen sport freely. But 51 people dead 50 people severely wounded some who will carry disabilities for the rest of their lives—it provided an environment which made it very very challenging to allow things to continue as they were. The Prime Minister made a call; we support the Prime Minister.But we also support the rights of some people like sporting shooters to go on about participating in that sport. Whilst we have not gained the concession that we wanted from Labour in that respect to make competitive sporting shooting competitions—three-gun military service rifle—an allowable sport to allow those people who compete internationally all over the world many of whom are professionals highly qualified people. You have to be to be able to afford to undertake their sport. Many of whom demonstrate weapons skills and weapons safety standards far higher than a lot of the police officers that I see carrying around their AR-15 Bushmasters on the streets of New Zealand on a daily basis. Many of these people—many of these people—without going into names are actually members of the police force. They are actually members of the Defence Force. They are actually people who by dint of the occupation and the security clearances they hold and the appointments they hold in the police force and in the New Zealand Defence Force are highly responsible New Zealanders. It does sadden New Zealand First that they are not able to continue that sport.But it's not over—it's not over—because the one thing that New Zealand First has negotiated in this piece of legislation—a couple of things in particular—is a post-implementation review. In that post-implementation review we mean—whether we're in coalition Government with National or coalition Government with Labour—to review and test the risk benefits that were argued. Any good post-implementation review goes back to the initial business case to the detailed business case and tests what's happened against what was stated would happen. When that test is done the new Parliament of the day will make a decision as to whether these decisions that we're making here today on the advice of police stack up.I guess the part that the New Zealand First caucus takes a great deal of pride in—at least satisfaction and finds solace and consolation—is in the fact that we will have an independent arms authority established in the next term of Government. We would have liked to have seen that happen but COVID's intervened. The legislative timetable doesn't allow for the new legislation to be written. We would have seen a change to the purpose of this Act. We would have seen that purpose widened so that an independent arms authority would have fitted the scope of the bill. We would have seen that legislation drafted tabled in this House and passed through all three readings before the House lifted. That's been interdicted.I want to thank Minister Nash for coming around to our way of thinking. It was useful actually that Sir Justice Thorp had recommended that in his report in 1997. I've got to say New Zealand First has been the strongest advocate and supporter of the New Zealand Police for the last 25 years 27 years that we've been in existence. It is through the various things that we've done in coalition agreements whether it was with National or Labour that over time we've increased the strength of the police by over 3500 people.Hon Nathan Guy: But you're not going to deal with the gangs in this.Hon RON MARK: That is because of our belief that the police need the resources to deal with such things Hon Nathan Guy as gangs. So we're starting to hear about—and we understand the desire for police to interdict the weapons supply to gangs. I mean it was me who tried to table a bill—Hon Member: Last moment.Hon RON MARK: —because at that time—to that member: you've been partaking already. It was me that tried to table a bill in this House called the Suppression of Gangs Bill that got vetoed ironically by Labour and then not taken up either by National. That would have made it illegal to be a member of an organised crime unit or entity or a gang. But ironically the people who talk about empowering the police to deal to gangs never supported that proposition at all. I think we tried twice to table it in the House. There is no question about New Zealand First's support of the police force offering up law changes that give them greater powers to deal with organised crime. In this coalition agreement Mr Nash knows there are aspects of this coalition agreement that give greater resources to the police to deal with organised crime. The jury and time will tell us the House whether or not this legislation has stopped the gangs importing and accessing firearms.I want to say a big shout-out to Mark Patterson my caucus member who advocated strongly for the farmers to ensure that they had access to semi-automatic centre fire weapons to deal with pest controls. I've been down in Southland and I've been down in Otago and around those areas where the wallabies and the hares and the rabbits run free and I know the difficulty of trying to shoot rabbits on the run with a bolt action rifle and trying to shoot goats and wallabies. Give it a go if you think you can do it without a centre fire semi-automatic weapon.I want to thank the New Zealand First caucus for their steadfastness. The post-implementation review of this Act will happen. The extension out to five years before the registration system comes into being is set in stone. In that time we will assess no doubt how it's rolling out its effectiveness against the criteria laid down by Sir Justice Thorp and decisions will be made at that time. So I'd just say to people that this Government and New Zealand First as part of this Government is passing this legislation. But don't be rolling out the bubbles and popping the cork too quickly because after this election is over there will be closer scrutiny on what we've done and the costs and benefits and whether or not this is delivered to the people.By the way many of us are looking forward to the report from the royal commission so we understand better what happened how that person got access to a firearm and those vast quantities of ammunition that were signed off and what changes should happen on the basis of the royal commission's finding. I want to finish by thanking—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! The member's time has expired.