Webb DuncanDr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central): Thank you. Tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakawā.As the MP for Christchurch Central it was a real privilege to sit on the Finance and Expenditure Committee that considered this. Dr Russell's contribution made it very clear that it is personal but I in my short contribution want to really just make a couple of essentially more technical points. I think it's important to recognise that this is a law that really must work. This process is one that I think is probably in my short time here the best parliamentary process I've seen because the committee and Parliament have come together and agreed that in policy terms this is the right step.But let it not be thought that that select committee process was self-congratulatory in any way. It was one where members had vigorous discussions and did not agree on every point. I think the work that the select committee has done coming back with its report has significantly improved the bill. It does record dissenting views by no less than three of the parties that comprise this Parliament and that's a good process. It sends a signal that there's more work to be done in this area but also I think what is a really important value underpinning this bill—I think it was Mr Bayly that said it was a privilege to bear arms in this country and I think that's right. It's not a right in any sense of that word; it's very much a privilege and one which must be balanced. The discussions in select committee seek to strike that balance in terms of the kinds of firearms that can be used and the people who are entitled to do that.I sit on the Regulations Review Committee as well and that committee advised the Finance and Expenditure Committee that it had some concerns. It drew the committee's attention to what are called Henry VIII clauses—the ability of the executive to amend the definition of what a prohibited firearm was and various other definitions in the Act and not only to amend but also to replace. In committee that was looked at in some detail. And whilst some members of the committee still have concerns it was amended.So the change was that it was no longer going to be possible to replace that definition but it could still be amended by executive order. I think that's important because it shows a further constraint. If people come back and look at what happened at committee and what happened in this House they can look at that retreat and accept that a wholesale change of what kinds of firearms are prohibited is not contemplated by that section; rather there is a continual updating of the definitions to make sure that when nefarious people make changes to firearms not contemplated by the Act it can be updated. We saw some very alarming video clips I must say showing how people could indeed alter firearms to make something which might not strictly break the rules be extremely lethal and well outside of what was contemplated. So that was a good example of the process.The heirlooms and mementos exception that was introduced was also another good example of that process as well as testing out and developing what that might mean. Rather than just using the words heirlooms and mementos" as the Act does at the moment it is a case of exploring how that test might be applied. I must say the police and officials were very helpful in that process and accepted a test of reasonableness one that looked at all of the circumstances: the significance of the firearm; the fact that it had some special perhaps family significance; the nature of the person their history perhaps—they might be entitled to a firearms license per se but this was a particularly dangerous firearm and perhaps this person might or might not be suitable—and all of the other circumstances surrounding that firearm. So there was a really good example.What we have here is an ongoing conversation about how to strike the balance between people having firearms for quite legitimate uses and the safety of our community. It's a conversation that's ongoing but this is an important first step. I commend this bill to the House."