Mark Ron; Rurawhe AdrianHon RON MARK (Minister of Defence): Thank you Mr Speaker. Well it falls to me to stand and speak on behalf of the New Zealand First caucus on this Arms Legislation Bill before the House. As I start I want to do a couple of things. Firstly I want to acknowledge all those New Zealanders who made submissions.I want to acknowledge the feeling of hunters and shooters who have always been law-abiding citizens of this country who have never transgressed who have always demonstrated absolute responsibility as they've participated in their chosen sport: be that service rifle; be that deer stalking; be that duck shooting; be that trap down the line skeet whatever—all of which I myself have participated in.I want to acknowledge that those law-abiding New Zealanders who have been declared fit and proper people for a long time were just as horrified by the events of 15 March as anyone else in this House. For many it was the nightmare that they feared might happen one day. I want to acknowledge that most of those people also share the same objective of wanting the Government of the day to ensure that our streets are safe and that we have laws and restrictions and constraints in place around access to firearms that do keep people safe.I want to acknowledge the Cabinet decision to remove military-style assault rifles from the hands of category A licence holders. That's a deliberate decision made by the Cabinet and advanced with police recommendations in the form of this bill.I want to acknowledge the fair and reasonable concerns raised of those who would have preferred to have seen the royal commission report before legislation went through. The New Zealand First caucus understands their view.I want to acknowledge the Finance and Expenditure Committee for the improvements they have made to the bill and for demonstrating through the amendments that they have agreed to—and this is by majority—that a number of the propositions being put forward in the legislation under the recommendations of New Zealand Police were unnecessary and even as stated by the committee itself deemed to be unsound. I want to acknowledge the Minister of Police for accepting those recommended changes to the legislation.I have to acknowledge that there are quite substantial changes being put forward by the committee and I won't rotary hoe that paddock because I know we're going to get to the committee of the whole House and those amendments will be debated I know very strongly. So I won't go through them but I think it's fair to say that the New Zealand First caucus has some reservations. Indeed our leader the Rt Hon Winston Peters did say on 19 October 2019 when we were in Christchurch and we went out to listen to and speak to some firearms owners who held a very orderly almost family picnic-type protest in Latimer Square to quote him New Zealand First was going into this process with open ears. We did not have in his words tin ears—that we had asked them to express their views their concerns make their points during the select committee process and that we would listen that the New Zealand First caucus would listen.Indeed on 7 February Clayton Mitchell who is the New Zealand First spokesperson for sport and recreation and has been attending select committee hearings on this bill tweeted and said NZ First looks forward to continuing to work constructively with Minister Nash over the Arms Legislation to get the optimal balance between legal gun use and compliance as well as restating our Party's views that police should be targeting criminals not law abiding gun owners." Mr Clayton Mitchell MP has been firm and resolute in that and has been supported by the caucus as a whole. Those things have not changed. The New Zealand First caucus have always said that they'll work constructively towards sensible legislation that is pragmatic that achieves the purpose of the bill improving safety is fair and is reasonable.Much has been made in this debate and during the course of the passage of the bill through select committee about gangs and the threats that they pose and how this is going to resolve that. I just want to point out that I've been in this House a wee while and I've heard this debate when National's been on this side of the House and Labour on that side; propositions by the late Rt Hon Mike Moore when he fought against gangs for tougher legislation on gangs when he was part of Labour in Opposition and he met with a tin ear from National. I have been on those benches myself proposing a suppression of gangs bill and having it turned down by the same Labour Party because they thought it was too tough. Then I have sat there and watched the National Party join with Mr Stuart Nash when he was in Opposition and support a select committee inquiry that of all things recommended a registration system of firearms and all of this in the name of reducing gang violence.I'd say I'm probably the only father in the House who's actually had a daughter sitting in a car beside another car where a woman was shot through the chest by a gang member in a drive-by shooting. I also have a son who's a front-line police officer who tells me: "Dad every day of every week we're picking up firearms off of gangs and something has to be done about it." New Zealand First is looking for a pragmatic way through that also protects as far as we possibly can the rights and privileges of legitimate firearms owners and firearms users.I want to conclude by saying two things. The committee of the whole House is a place where this debate will be worked through. Mr Mitchell has already made it clear and I'm talking with Minister Nash about some things that we just want to settle in our head. One of those things is resolving the question—and it was discussed in the select committee's deliberations—around the proposal to instate and Chlöe Swarbrick raised this issue the question as to whether or not police should continue to administer firearms law; the question as to whether it's appropriate to have an entity that is the enforcer of the law and the writer of the law where the separation of powers is blurred.Right now it is of concern to me and to New Zealand First that the confidence of firearms owners in police has been undermined. New Zealand First has all along said there is need here for a conversation about an arms authority that takes that statutory responsibility thus leaving the police to one side to simply enforce the law just as New Zealand Transport Authority issue the drivers licences determine the testing regime decide who is fit and proper to have a drivers licence. So too there is a strong argument we would contest for a separate body doing that leaving the police not to write the law or rewrite it through regulation according to what they wish but leaving them just to enforce the law.So I think this conversation has to go on. I think there was a further conversation to be had around farmers who have serious problems with pest control. There is a serious conversation to be had around sporting shooters and there's also some recognition due to COLFO. It hurts me to hear people labelling an organisation the Council of Licenced Firearms Owners as a gun lobby or equivalent to the National Rifle Association.Brett Hudson: Well that's your Minister Mr Mark.Hon RON MARK: That hurts me Mr Hudson because something that I don't think members of this House do realise or understand is that certain people in this country by virtue of the endorsements they hold are muted and have their hands tied behind their back. If they come forward to make a submission they immediately identify themselves in public as being a collector or a restricted firearms owner which opens their home up to being a target for gangs seeking access to these types of firearms. They are never going to jeopardise their personal safety by coming along and publicly identifying. These people are lawyers doctors professionals—I know one who's an economist. I know many of these people are schoolteachers. They are very responsible law-abiding New Zealanders and they need an organisation like COLFO to represent their concerns because they cannot for fear of identifying themselves and putting their family's safety at risk. So we acknowledge that and we will do our very best to represent their interests. Thank you and I say to the committee—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! The member's time has expired."