SpeechBRETT HUDSON (National): Thank you Mr Chair. I have some questions to the Minister of Police on my Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) on sports shooting exemptions. Last night when I first introduced this and the Minister of Police responded then he raised issues saying Well it would allow lots more people to have exemptions to use prohibited firearms. It's not really a sport because it's not in the Olympic Games or the Commonwealth Games." and he also said "Oh the National Rifle Association (NRA) would just be able to come here and set up clubs and we wouldn't be able to stop them." Well I'd just like to challenge the Minister on that. I have some questions for him to actually consider and answer.The first part is: is the Minister actually aware that most—not all but most—of the individuals who participate in these sorts of sport shooting events that might use prohibited category firearms such as the International Practical Shooting Confederation three-gun competitions and the Service Rifle Association competitions—there are others but they are the predominant ones. Is he aware that most—admittedly not all—of those people are people that for instance are pistol users and hold B-category endorsements so are already subject to and followers of the conditions which he has acknowledged in this committee in this debate this morning who are reliable and trustworthy and can be depended on to hold and use their firearms appropriately. They're the same people. So it doesn't introduce 2000 more people that could possibly have prohibited category firearms or some sort of restricted firearm. It actually is a much smaller increment. So what Minister is the evidence that the risk profile would change substantially to not warrant such an exemption? On the matter of the legitimacy or validity of the sporting competitions: on what grounds is it that a sport or a sporting code specific discipline is only legitimate if it is part of the roster of events at an Olympic or Commonwealth Games? I hold that that is a complete fallacy. It is a straw man for one thing but it's a complete fallacy to put forward. There are many sports. There are certainly many disciplines within sporting codes that are not part of the Olympics or the Commonwealth Games but they are very real and they are particularly very real to the participants of them many of whom are able to compete for world championship medals and trophies. They hold them as valid as any other world championship medal or trophy. So on what grounds can it be argued that a sport is not a real sporting competition if it's not in the Olympics or the Commonwealth Games? I contend that it isn't a basis for argument and therefore it's not a basis to refuse to have this sort of sports shooting exemption in this country.The third point the Minister made on the NRA coming over and setting up clubs—I highlight for the Minister's attention my SOP. It says that that must be certified by the commissioner. I'll put it as a question: does he have confidence in the ability for the commissioner to make reasonable determinations on what should be certified? I know I do and I'd certainly hope that he would too. And if not the commissioner today—because it is the police that are administering the Arms Act today and if this bill passes—but into the future would he have confidence? Would he expect to have confidence in the head of an independent body that might administer the Arms Act to likewise make certifications under appropriate grounds? So actually Minister each of the three points you raised as to why the sport shooting exemption shouldn't be approved I think I've answered and I'd like you to come back with responses to my questions because in the face of that I can't see any reason why any member of this committee except maybe the Greens who have always been staunchly opposed to firearms would vote against it. I'd certainly look across to Mr Mark. Here's an opportunity for New Zealand First to vote for an SOP that will actually give firearms owners one of the things that I've called for. Stand up and be an independent party; vote in favour of it. We'll win. The firearms owners will get what they deserve and that's democracy in action. It's actually MMP in action Mr Mark. So here's your opportunity. Let's do this."