So the WA Police Minsiter sat in on the phone & was interviewed by Gareth Parker on Breakfast with Gareth Parker on 6PR the 13th of April 2022.
It was bizarre & curious. In fact it left many of us with a ton of "what the hell moments"
I think he's went cunning stunt and was trying to deliver a certain type of politically skewed optic and well...it kinda didn't go very well at all. In fact if anything it seemed very John Quigley and in need of a second go over. It seemed more about the National Shooting Council from the Eastern States & then bagging the Upper House.
In regards to the National Shooting Council (NSC), they apprarently wrote to Labor Candidates in the Federal election. So far nearly all WA Shooters I've spoken to haven't heard of the NSC. Well Mr Papalia, they have now & if its part of a national recruitment drive, you've just helped them a lot.
Mr Papalia when speaking of NSC said that they...
Mr Papalia MLA - “...seem to be absolutely
opposed to us rewriting our Firearms Act which almost 50 years old. We’re the
only jurisdiction in the country that hasn’t rewritten our Act since the
National Firearms Agreement in 1996 and um why they think they have, should
have a say, but why they think that’s the wrong thing to do is beyond me.”
I am concerned it is actually beyond him.
1) At at this stage, we can only go by the letter WA Federal Labor Candidates recieved that was not made public so, we're going by what Mr Papalia thinks of what apparently was said. Strangely I haven't come across a licenced shooter who didn't have one or many objections with the WA Firearms Legislation. Its just curious that nothign has happened since 1996 or the handing down of the Law Reform Commission report in 2016. He's personally had nearly 5 years.
2) We can't read the letter so who knows what the eastern states group from the east thinks or is about. Mr Papalia made a reference to the US group the NRA which is kinda of strange. They have different laws, constituitional rights & the largest portion of the gun crime is drug & gang related. Plus they have the ability to use firearms for self defence & some places concealed & open carrying of firearms. We have none of these so any comparisons with the US are only any good for pushing a falsely bolstered agenda.
3) Everyone can have a say, no one gets to say who can & cannot have a say...until its time to open things for public consultation. In this case an Eastern States group can write to political candidates in WA and say whatever they want. It will not affect any re-writing of the Firearms Act that Mr Papalia is noww doing after 5 years, no effect at all...they will be Federal candidates, not state so its very curious & bizarre as to why he is bothered about it at all, going on radio to complain about it or get a bit upset about it. Few of us have made comments about Biden & Trump...no one in the USA cares what we say or think. Honestly they don't.
Mr Papalia MLA - “The primary concern I have about that is the National Firearms Agreement said
that public safety should be, should have primacy, it should be the number one
consideration in Firearms Legislation and in Western Australia its not. That is
what we said is the primary objective of re-writing the Act, is to elevate
community safety to the, the number one consideration in the Act and we intend
doing that and if they think they are going to have an influence over ah you
know stopping us from doing that then they’re really sorely mistaken”
Ahh well...
4) See answer 3 above.
5) I don't think the Eastern States group will have any influence. Over who? Federal Candidates before and/or after they're elected? No.
6) We assume there will be a public consultation period. There should be. The current amendments before the Upper House had NO PUBLIC OR STAKE HOLDER CONSULTATION AT ALL PRIOR TO THE BILL'S FORMATION.
But the Minister didn't mention that.
7) The Minister should know that public safety is everyone's primary responsibility. Sadly after Port Arthur no money was spent on serious mental health after a deranged psycopath WITH NO FIREARM'S LICENCE was able to aquire several illegal firearms, one possibly not even legal in Tasmania. Instead, half a billion dollars was spent buying back guns of those people who either thought it was the right thing to do or thought it was an easy way to get paid for old guns. Arguably public safety missed the mark a little.
8) Lawful Firearms Owners are part of the community. It would be wise to apply say a 10-15 year custodial sentence for possession of an illegal firearm...PER FIREARM. Served CONSECUTIVELY and that would fit in with making the public's safety a primary concern. It will make life safer for Lawful Fiream's Owners too Mr Papalia, for they too are members of society & with the strictest jail penalties on the planet, we would see public safety improved. Lawful Firearms Owners are members of the WA Community aren't Mr Papalia, surely?
Mr Papalia MLA - "In this case we’re just talking about re-writing the Act, um it’s ridiculous
that they should be opposing it. There’s another concern Gareth, right now beyond
re-writing the Act, I have an amendment to the Firearms Act in the Upper House
of State Parliament to target Bikies, terrorists & family and domestic
violence offenders and I got an assurance from the opposition that that
legislation would go through parliament without any, any problem at all. Ah it
passed through the Lower House no problem. The opposition leader & deputy
confirmed that they were supporting the legislation and yet last week the ah,
the opposition ah people in the Upper House delayed the progress of that Bill
and now we’re waiting until the next sitting of Parliament for it to be brought
on for debate again. This is necessary legislation. The Police have requested
it to take on Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs, to ensure we’ve got powers, ah to
prevent terrorists and, and serious family and domestic violence offenders from
having guns and its being stopped in the Upper House by the opposition. I think
because of these people on the East Coast sending them emails.
9) The Amendment is before the Upper House alright, its the one that was formed behind closed doors & invloved (as best we can know) the minister's office, WAPolice Bureacrats, a Law Firm and possibly the Attorney General but we're only guessing. We do know no one knew about it until the Attorney General slipped up in Parliament & mentioned it and in the Hansard video you can clearly see the shocked look on Mr Papalia's face & hear clearly his comment "Don't tell them that"
No community or industry stakeholders were consulted. None.
10) It has been said many times that it targets Outlaw Motor Cycle Gangs, Terrorists & Family & Domestic Violence Offenders. I know of no law abiding shooters against that. That is a criminal set, not lawful, law abiding WA Citizens. It should not affect anyone who is lawful, firearms owner or not.
11) We don't know what assurance the Opposition gave, but an assurance in supporting it is not a blank cheque, it must go through the full process & I think the small group in the Lower House were not equipped to deal with it at short notice. Thankfully we have a sort of House of Review in the Upper House and thankfully in their number on the Opposition benches are a number of experienced lawyers.
12) So Police requested it. Did not hear before who's idea this was. A little more open transperancy there may have had those details out before.
13) This is a big one. "...and its being stopped in the Upper House by the opposition. I think because of these people on the East Coast sending them emails."
I think the Minister won't repeat that in the Parliament, because as much as there is parliamentary privelege it does not extend to being allowed to "mislead the House" and its quite likely that might qualify as misleading.
Why? Because the minister does not know if the NSC are sending opposition MPs emails let alone did they both opening them after staff ran the reasonable filter over them & logged them as being non Western Australians. Of if then the NSC if they did make it to a Opposition MP desk that the Opposition MP took fright of an interstate group largely unheard of here and did as they thought was asked of them.
The minister does not have covert access to Opposition MPs private correspondance does he?
Does he?
I hope he does not, but he doesn't does he?
I think he isn't running secret surveillance on Opposition MP correspondence, I think these things didn't happen as he suggests & I think he's guessing, suggesting and inferring false actions to demonise the Opposition & the NSC who have debatable interaction. Get him to repeat it in Parliament, get him to prove it. Simple as the logic behind the fork.
Is the Police Minsiter having a Quigley/Biden moment?
Gareth Parker - "Didn’t your shadow Peter Collier try to get a committment that Law Abiding
Firearm Owners wouldn’t be affected?"
Mr Papalia MLA - "He, I, every question that was asked in the Upper House last week was answered
in the Lower House, ah weeks before, ah in a debate in consideration in detail
where they were able to ask questions, all of these questions that were posed
by these people on the East Coast who shouldn’t have any say at all in the
matter ah were already answered in the Lower House where Government is formed,
where normal practises where arrangements between the parties is agreed. The leader
of the opposition undertook to support the legislation, gets to the Upper
House, ah the guys there in the Liberal & National Parties get emails from
people on the East Coast and then start ah delaying the legislation as, is, in
response to these people. I don’t know what, what is motivating them”
14) This was simple, he made it complicated & elusive. He spent a long time giving a tactial political reply rather than simply give a simple answer. Like "We've given assurances that no Lawful Firearms Owner will be negatively affected by the current Amendment before the Upper House" but instead clouds of diversionary smoke. Totally unwarranted, totally unhelpful, decidedly slippery & obviously political and deflective for some reason.
15) He said all these questions were posed by the people on the east coast but all he had to do to short circuit those people and genuine WA people's concerns was answer the damn question.
He also seems to not know what the process of Parliament actually is, somehow he thinks the Upper House must not be seperate from the Lower House & must conform to whatever the Lower Hosue has already predetermined.
Somehow he thinks the Upper House must conform completely to the Lower House, not question the Lower House and become a rubber stamp cheer squad.
I remember VERY clearly how the Premier boldly declared 24 September 2019 The WALabor Government's leader, the WA Premier said — "This is good legislation. It is very well drafted and carefully considered. The government has devoted a huge amount of resources to this bill. It does not require amendment".
Let me remind you what the then Health Minsiter Roger Cook said when blasting the opposition...
"The fact they have sought the call, moved so many motions and asked so many often repetitive questions really just shows they’ve got contempt for the public.
There’s no reason they cannot do a solid piece of analysis and scrutiny of the Bill without unduly delaying it … now is the time they get on with it and finish the job.”
55 amendments followed.
25 came from Nick Goiran MLA (Lib)
18 came from the Government (ALP)
6 came from Martin Aldridge MLA (Nats)
4 came from Adele Farina (ALP)
1 came from Martin Pritchard (ALP)
1 came from Alison Xamon (Greens)
So the WA Labor Premier has quite a bit of egg on his face. Because of the 55 amendments passed but seemingly were not required, 23 came from Labor Members.
The Upper House must do its job & do it properly without fear or favour and act independently of the Lower House & the Government.
Mr Papalia has a short memory, bad knowledge of how legislation is supposed to progress and be decided or hopes you have none at all.
16) Notice this... "...ah the guys there in the Liberal & National Parties get emails from people on the East Coast and then start ah delaying the legislation as, is, in response to these people. I don’t know what, what is motivating them" How do we know what the Upper House MPs recieved from the NSC, how do we know for sure it prompted them to do anything other than what is the proper independent job as Upper House MPs & how are we ever likely to believe the Minister?
This is not jsut slippery slope stuff, this is half way down at break neck speed.
The Police Minister is seemingly on a new Olympic Event & trying to win Gold with a stunning performance of Out-Quigleying Mr Quigley.
Gareth Parker - "Ok, Um I guess all I would say is that without knowing all the details the
Upper House has always been the House of Review and that has happened over the
journey, anyway, thank you Paul, appreciate your time."
Since the Burke Years I've seen & heard some deplorable efforts by MPs of all stripes. Can't say this one takes the cake, but half the cake tin is empty and Mr Papalia has a mouthful of something and its not succient straight forward answers. I think his aim with this interview was to set up a few villains, demonise them, select some high ground and try to befriend people with bull dust & avoid the question Gareth Parker asked that if answered properly would have settled all critics, got all law abiding people on board with him & devalued anything the largely unknwon NSC has supposedly said. Instead he played another hand of deflection demonising for political gain...and he was cooked by his own hand.
The real worry is which is which. Its clearly & utterly a completely underwhelming effort from Mr Papalia but I'm concerned if he is best suited for the Rewriting of the Firearms Act & is Mr Quigely.
At present, its looking very bad for WA citizens whether they legally possess firearms or not because Firearms Safety, the Public's Safety is unlikely until this minister embraces point 8) up above.
This is the same minister who put the bullet holes on street maps to represent gun owners in Perth.
I have never seen anything like this. It is a serious concern.
To hear the Minister yourself, click the link below, hit play & scrub forward until the last 10-15 minutes of the show. Listen for the Minsiter's pause after Gareth asked him about Peter Collier's seeking of assurances. Bit awkward perhaps...you decide.
Breakfast with Gareth Parker: Breakfast with Gareth Parker - Full Show Highlights 13th April 2022 on Apple Podcasts
No comments:
Post a Comment