Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of the ACT Party in opposition to this bill. Why? Because it is morally and practically bankrupt. Fundamentally this bill is about punishing the law-abiding while leaving law-breakers to get off scot-free and there are so many more problems within that. One that I never would've thought we'd hear from this Government is that it undermines the doctor-patient relationship in respect to mental health. Who is going to go to their doctor and say they're not feeling so well when they know that the Government has sent a message from Parliament that their doctor is on duty to report on them and take their rights away if they feel they're not quite right themselves?It also promises a register of firearms. Everywhere it's been tried in every country that has tried one it has been found to be impractical. They need 90 percent compliance to be remotely close to effective. Nowhere in the world has got over 70 and countries that have tried it have abandoned them. But actually the reason a register doesn't work should be intuitive. If somebody is a fit and proper person with a firearm what difference does it make if that particular firearm is registered? And if a person is somebody who shouldn't have a firearm and is not a fit and proper person according to the law then they should not have a firearm whether it is registered or not.One of the most important safeguards to ensure that we have responsible use of firearms in this country can be summed up in one word: community. Up and down this country people get together and form clubs to keep an eye on each other to upskill each other and to make sure that firearms are used with appropriate skill and responsibility. Well what does this bill do? It places a regulatory burden on those clubs that will make them more expensive to operate and in many cases for the smaller informal ones ensures that they will disband go underground and people will start shooting up cans on their mate's farm instead of having any kind of social operation whatsoever.The member in charge of the bill Stuart Nash said he doesn't want to be a Minister with regrets for not doing anything and I can understand that. All Ministers are mindful of their own place in history. He should be saying he doesn't want to be a Minister who failed to do anything effective—and that's the critical point. There is nothing effective in bringing a bill to this Parliament that punishes the law-abiding and does nothing at all to the criminals. It's not going to make New Zealanders safer but it is going to put a huge burden on those who are trying to follow the law.It's a great irony for this Government that talks so much about social capital and wellbeing that they have chosen to respond to our nation's greatest peacetime tragedy by scapegoating othering and generally treating with contempt a group of several hundred thousand law-abiding New Zealanders. I remain genuinely puzzled that the Prime Minister who speaks the language of kindness and inclusion chose to follow a process that was so rushed and so improper and so accusatory of a group of law-abiding New Zealanders it would make Robert Muldoon blush. But she did it and now this Government is doing it again.What might have been a smarter response to firearm laws in New Zealand that would truly honour the victims of our nation's tragedy in Christchurch? Well the first thing they could have done is thought This Government has a royal commission to find out what went wrong. Why not wait to see what the royal commission reports and find out what went wrong before attempting to fix it?" That would be smart. Then on brand and on message for this Government it could follow the ACT Party's initiative of having a hui and bringing those law-abiding firearm owners—those with an interest in the policy area—the police and those who are associated with the victims all around the table and had a constructive discussion about how to make firearm laws better. That would not only be better for the dignity of our democracy; it would have got better laws but sadly we have this which the ACT Party proudly opposes. Thank you Mr Speaker."