Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. I rise on behalf of the ACT Party in opposition to this bill and let me start as other members of the House have by paying tribute to the victims of the Christchurch terror attacks only a couple of weeks ago. It is because of that incident that we are here. Let me acknowledge the will of New Zealanders to be safe and let me acknowledge the very human urge in times of crisis when a group such as New Zealanders are under attack to fall in behind and follow the leader who promises decisive action. That is human that is normal but that is not necessarily what is best for New Zealand.We in this House have a different role and that is to ensure that the laws that are made are made properly with public consultation that is sincere and parliamentary scrutiny that irons out the ruts and the potential unintended consequences of the laws that we make for New Zealanders. That duty if it's important normally hasn't become less important by these circumstances. It's not made less important by the fact that gun law is so critical. It is more important right now than ever. The fact of the matter is that we as parliamentarians have a greater duty to do due process and scrutinise laws than at any other time because if gun control is important then it's important to do it right.It's the fact that the timing of this legislation is somewhat curious and it makes me for one somewhat sceptical because right now thanks to an Order in Council on 20 March the Thursday before last this Government has ensured that semi-automatic weapons are all but on lockdown only able to be possessed used traded and imported by people with E Category licences. For everyone else they are on de facto lockdown and that Order in Council that restriction from the Government lasts till June next year. So we have a situation where there's a moratorium on the dangerous stuff—a pretty sensible one—and the Government has a year plus to make sensible thoughtful legislation and the Government is indicating that it will do that as soon as this piece of legislation has been passed. So one has to wonder what exactly we are doing with this piece of legislation. It would appear that it is more about political theatre than public safety. This piece of legislation were it completely harmless might not matter in that regard but it very well may be harmful.Here's a scenario of where this piece of legislation that will barely be scrutinised by a select committee and that will barely be scrutinised by Parliament could go wrong. What will the Government say come September when the amnesty period that the bill sets out is over and the estimates are that there are still tens of thousands of dangerous semi-automatic weapons unaccounted for that haven't been bought back that weren't registered with E Category licence holders and that we have good reason to believe are out there? Well that genuinely scares me. And by the way if this goes through the way the Government plans and the law-abiding gun owners whom we need as allies have been alienated by this process and its abruptness then we've got a bigger problem than we've got now. What will happen if one of those weapons—by the way it's not just me saying that; it's the New Zealand Police in their regulatory impact statement saying that we risk forcing arms into the black market—is used for another tragedy? How smart will we feel then having been the leaders that rushed legislation through Parliament in only nine days?So I urge caution. I urge public consultation. I urge that we do our job as a Parliament and truly honour the victims of this tragedy by defending our democracy and our due process of public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny and making good laws because if gun control is important it's important to do it right but doing it in nine days before we go on Easter break is not doing it right and I can't support this legislation at the first reading.