McKelvie IanIAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): Thank you Mr Speaker. If there was ever a case for restricting speeches in member's bills to five minutes today has clearly been a great example of that. Having listened to some of the speeches it can only distress you to think that this is a member's day where effectively members are entitled to bring bills to the House and if they're lucky enough they get it drawn. To then be shot down criticised—in fact very unpleasantly criticised—by members of the Government I think is a disgrace. I also think that to attack other parties over a bill like this is a disgrace on a members' day.I will now get on to the bill. We've got to go back in history a little bit to understand the genesis of this bill and Chris Bishop touched on it earlier. I've sat in this Parliament for some time now and I've sat on every gun inquiry and every gun select committee hearing there's been in my time in Parliament.The 2017 inquiry into firearms in gangs' hands was mentioned earlier. One of the interesting things that came out of those recommendations—well there was two interesting things actually. One was that there was a lot of discussion about firearms and how they got into the hands of gangs the ownership of them; and there was also quite a lot of discussion around firearms prohibition orders. The ironic thing of that was that one party opposed all that stuff as it came out of the select committee back to the Minister who at the time was Paula Bennett—that was New Zealand First who then later supported this bill as it went back to the select committee. So there's irony everywhere you look on this thing. We then get to the very unfortunate Christchurch shooting and the gun legislation that was put through the House by the Government as a result of that where effectively we took guns from all the honest people in New Zealand from collectors enthusiasts farmers hunters ex-servicemen and –women and we left the guns with all the criminals in New Zealand. We made no attempt at that time to effectively buy those guns back. We offered them an amnesty—well no criminals are going to walk into the police station with a gun are they? So that was never going to happen. We could have however offered them the opportunity to sell those guns back because we paid everyone else for their guns except for those people who didn't have a licence. And so lots of these guns are held by people without firearms licences. Those guns are all still out in our community. And if you listen to the police estimates of the numbers of them in excess of 200000 of them still out in our community. I don't doubt for a minute that the police didn't understand how many guns the gangs held so they weren't counted in those numbers that we've dealt with. We then went into the second gun buy back which was no more expensive and in fact cost more to run than they got or paid out in buy back for guns. So very fraught pieces of legislation have dealt with this.We now come to the piece of legislation that Simeon Brown has had drawn out of the ballot some time ago actually. In fact Brett Hudson was the first person to put this bill in the ballot and he was the police spokesman in the last National Opposition. Prior to that Chris Bishop of course had that same role. So both of them have had significant experience in dealing with firearms prohibition orders. The bill that Chris Bishop had drawn was thrown out and back into the House it comes it gets sent to the select committee and comes back with some recommendations and I don't think any piece of legislation we ever put through this house is perfect but at least it gave the Government and the police an opportunity to progress this bill in a manner that could have been some use.Now we've had a whole lot of criticism about why it would be no use why it wouldn't work—all the excuses under the sun as to why it wouldn't work. But actually a piece of legislation that goes through this House gets improved as it goes through a select committee process and gets improved again as it goes sometimes through the committee of the whole House ends up as legislation. They are always implementable. Probably the worst example of one that wasn't was the Resource Management Act actually. That's been a disaster right from the start. So it's easy to have a bill that doesn't work.This bill in my view would have worked would have played a role in getting to a point where at least the police would have had a tool. And the really interesting thing for me was the speech of Greg O'Connor who spoke beautifully for 10 minutes on this—well actually spoke about three minutes on the bill and seven minutes on other things. He never once mentioned his opposition to the bill and he couldn't because he knew this bill had some merit to the police. So I'm disappointed that the bill is clearly not going to pass but—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order the member's time has expired.