Thursday, 18 June 2026

 Anthony CARBINES (Ivanhoe – Leader of the House, Minister for Police, Minister for Community Safety, Minister for Victims, Minister for Racing) (15:10): Under the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006, I table a statement of compatibility:

In accordance with section 28 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006, (the Charter), I make this Statement of Compatibility with respect to the Firearms Amendment Bill 2026 (the Bill).

In my opinion, the Bill, as introduced to the Legislative Assembly, is compatible with the human rights protected by the Charter. I base my opinion on the reasons outlined in this statement.

Overview of the Bill

The Bill introduces amendments to the Firearms Act 1996 (Firearms Act). The purpose of the Bill is to amend the Firearms Act to:

• ensure the continuation of the firearm prohibition order (FPO) scheme;

• make further provision for the categorisation of firearms;

• increase penalties for offences relating to trafficking of firearms and FPOs;

• impose a citizenship requirement and a background check requirement on the holding of a licence under the Firearms Act;

• make consequential amendments to the Firearms Amendment Act 2018.

Human Rights

The human rights protected by the Charter that are relevant to this Bill are:

• the right to equal protection of the law without discrimination (section 8(3));

• the right to property (section 20); and

• the right to a fair hearing (section 24(1)).

Human Rights issues

Continuation of the FPO scheme

Part 2 of the Bill deals with the continuation of the FPO scheme introduced by the Firearms Amendment Act 2018 (the Amendment Act). Clauses 4, 5 and 6 repeal provisions of the Firearms Act and Amendment Act which collectively operated to effect the sunset of the FPO scheme on 8 May 2028, being 10 years after the scheme came into operation. The effect of these amendments is to make the FPO scheme permanent.

Making the FPO scheme permanent does not itself impose any new limits on human rights, but rather continues the limitations imposed by the Amendment Act when inserting Part 4A in the Firearms Act. I refer to the to the Statement of Compatibility which accompanied that Bill for a discussion of the human rights impacts of the already existing scheme.

While this Bill does not alter the substantive nature of the scheme beyond extending the duration of its operation, I acknowledge that the limitations on human rights affected by Part 4A of the Firearms Act are significant. While the majority of the rights limited by the Amendment Act were – for the reasons set out in the Statement of Compatibility for the Amendment Act – reasonably justified under s 7(2) of the Charter, the Minister introducing the Bill acknowledged that the FPO scheme may be incompatible with the right to privacy and the right of children to such protection as is in their best interests. This was because of police search powers having a low threshold precondition and that the FPO scheme applies to children under the age of 18 without modification as to the vulnerability of children. Notwithstanding the incompatibility, the Minister considered the FPO scheme appropriate and of pressing importance to protect the community from the risk of harm associated with increases in firearm-related offending – particularly in the context of serious and organised crime groups – where other law enforcement powers, including the ‘prohibited persons’ scheme, had proven inadequate. Reliance was also placed on the effectiveness of similar schemes in other jurisdictions.

In introducing this Bill, which has the effect of making the FPO scheme permanent, I am of the view that the limitations on human rights occasioned by the FPO scheme – and as dealt with in the statement of compatibility for the Amendment Act – while significant, continue to be warranted in order to protect public safety, and are justified in a free and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom. The FPO scheme, being a civil prohibition order scheme, authorises proactive crime prevention and is in my opinion an effective complement to the prohibited person scheme that applies to a person after a judicial process. When taken together, the FPO scheme and the prohibited person scheme form an integrated suite of crime prevention and law enforcement tools to protect the community from firearms-related violence. Based on Victoria Police advice, it is my opinion that it is necessary to continue the FPO scheme to provide Victoria Police with all of the powers reasonably required to respond to, and to prevent, the serious risks to life and community safety occasioned by violent firearm-related offending.

Categorisation of Firearms

Part 3 of the Bill concerns the categorisation of firearms and extends the legislative mechanisms to temporarily categorise classes of firearms. Clause 8 amends section 3A(1) of the Firearms Act to authorise the Chief Commissioner, after consulting with the Minister, to make a temporary declaration that has the effect of re-categorising any firearm or type of firearm (other than an antique handgun or black powder handgun).

The amendments to section 3A may have a resulting adverse effect on some licence holders’ property rights in that the re-categorisation of a firearm may mean that a person owning such a firearm no longer holds the appropriate category of licence to possess, carry or use that firearm, which may temporarily deprive them of property rights in relation to their continued possession, carriage or use of that firearm.

However, if a declaration is made by the Chief Commissioner, the Chief Commissioner must notify each person who is in possession of a firearm to which a declaration applies and the Chief Commissioner retains the discretion to allow an existing licence holder to continue to possess the firearm, or to renew their licence, in order to continue possessing, carrying or using that firearm. Also, the Chief Commissioner, when exercising their discretion to make a declaration under section 3A, is a public authority for the purposes of the Charter and is required to give proper consideration to the rights of any cohort of persons affected by the declaration, and act compatibly with those rights.

On this basis, I do not consider the property right in section 20 of the Charter to be limited by Part 3 of the Bill. To the degree that Part 3 does constitute a limit on the right to property, it is reasonably justified. The Rapid Review of Victoria’s Firearms Laws conducted Ken Lay AO APM identified existing classifications powers as too limited with the effect of restricting the ability to respond flexibly to changes in firearm design and risk. This amendment seeks to protect public safety and implement the recommendations of the Rapid Review.

Citizenship requirement on the holding of a licence under the Firearms Act

Part 6 of the Bill deals with the new citizenship requirement for the holding of a firearms or dealers licence under the Firearms Act. Clause 21 inserts new section 3D in the Firearms Act which introduces a citizenship requirement that restricts the availability of firearms licences to Australian citizens, New Zealand citizens who are Australian permanent residents in Australia and non-citizens of a class that is prescribed to satisfy the citizenship requirement. New section 3D(2) provides an exemption from the citizenship requirements if a person reasonably requires a firearm to earn a livelihood or belongs to a class of persons that is prescribed in the regulations to be exempt from the citizenship requirement. Section 3D(3) provides that a body corporate satisfies the citizenship requirement if each officer of the body corporate satisfies the citizenship requirement or is exempt from the citizenship requirement.

Clauses 22 to 26 and 28 to 30 insert in various provisions of the Firearms Act relating to various types of licence applications and renewals, the requirement that the Chief Commissioner must not issue a licence unless the Chief Commissioner is satisfied that the applicant satisfies the citizenship requirement or is exempt from that requirement.

Clause 27 inserts new section 46C in the Firearms Act, which provides that the Chief Commissioner must, if satisfied that a firearms licence holder does not satisfy the citizenship requirement and is not exempt from that requirement, cancel the licence holder’s licence. The provision requires the Chief Commissioner to invite the licence holder to provide evidence of their citizenship or exemption status, and to consider such evidence, before cancelling the person’s licence. Clause 31 inserts a similar provision providing for the cancellation of dealers licences under the Act. The cancellation of dealers licences under this provision extends to circumstances where the Chief Commissioner is satisfied that either the licence holder, a responsible person in relation to the licence, or a person employed in the business does not satisfy the citizenship requirement and is not exempt from that requirement.

Right to equality and non discrimination (s 8)

Section 8(3) of the Charter relevantly provides that every person is entitled to equal protection of the law without discrimination and has the right to equal and effective protection against discrimination. ‘Discrimination’ under the Charter is defined by reference to the definition in the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Equal Opportunity Act). The Equal Opportunity Act defines discrimination to mean discrimination on the basis of an attribute listed in section 6 of that Act and includes ‘race’ which in turn is defined to include ‘nationality’ or ‘national origin’. Whether nationality or national origin takes in ‘citizenship’ is unclear and will likely depend on context. This being so, I accept that on a broad view, nationality may be treated as tantamount to citizenship.

The purpose of section 8(3) of the Charter is to ensure that all laws and policies are applied equally, and do not have a discriminatory effect. Direct discrimination occurs where a person treats, or proposes to treat, a person with an attribute unfavourably because of that attribute. Adopting the broad reading of ‘race’ and ‘nationality’, the citizenship requirement introduced in the Firearms Act as it relates to licences could be considered as having a discriminatory effect on non-citizens and persons not otherwise exempt from the citizenship requirement, either directly or indirectly.

To the extent that the right is limited, it will be reasonably justified. As a starting point, differential treatment on the basis of being a non-citizen commonly occurs in many aspects of basic public life, such as in relation to eligibility for employment, voting rights, receipt of government benefits and services. The introduction of the citizenship requirement serves the important objective of implementing the agreement between the National Cabinet and state governments to, in the wake of the Bondi terror attack, overhaul and strengthen firearm controls and reduce firearms-related harm in Australia, including by restricting gun ownership to Australian citizens. In this regard, South Australia and Western Australia already have legislated citizenship requirements for firearm licences.

Secondly, the Rapid Review found that background checks conducted by Victoria Police primarily relied on Victorian intelligence holdings and self-declarations, and that international police checks presented challenges in accessing information through established methods and where intelligence holdings are inherently constrained.

Further, the National Firearms Agreement, established in response to the Port Arthur massacre in 1996, affirms that firearms possession and use is a privilege that is conditional on the overriding need to ensure public safety. The privilege of owning a firearm is an appropriate one to link to citizenship, which recognises a social contract between the person and their country of citizenship, and ensures that individuals who possess lethal weapons have a demonstrated long-term allegiance and accountability to the country. Citizenship comes with fundamental obligations and privileges, such as voting, and an allegiance of loyalty to Australia, its people, its democratic beliefs and the upholding of its laws. It is accordingly appropriate that the privilege, and solemn responsibility, of firearm possession, ownership and use be reclassed as a special privilege of a citizen. Notably, the citizenship requirement is subject to a specific carve-out for New Zealand permanent residents which reflects the unique Australia – New Zealand relationship and existing visa and information-sharing arrangements.

In addition, and importantly, from a human rights perspective, the United Nations and international human rights bodies do not generally recognise firearm ownership as a right and instead support governments adopting strict gun control measures to discharge their positive obligation to protect and promote the right to life (to which section 9 of the Charter is based). The prevailing consensus of international human rights treaty bodies is that collective public safety and the preservation of life outweigh individual persons’ desire for firearm ownership and there is an expectation that governments take reasonable steps to prevent firearms related violence committed by civilians.

For these reasons, I am of the opinion that the right to equal protection of the law without discrimination, if limited by the citizenship requirement introduced in Part 6 of the Bill, is reasonably justified.

Right to property (s 20)

Section 20 of the Charter provides that a person must not be deprived of their property other than in accordance with law. This right requires that powers which authorise the deprivation of property are conferred by legislation or common law, are confined and structured rather than unclear, are accessible to the public, and are formulated precisely. For an unlawful deprivation of property to occur, the interest affected, or interfered with, must be ‘property’. While property is not defined under the Charter, property is likely to include all real and personal property interests recognised under general law and may extend to holding a licence.

By inserting the citizenship requirement as a condition for the approval and renewal of firearms and dealers licences, and non-citizenship a ground for cancellation of firearms and dealers licences, the Bill expands the grounds upon which the Chief Commissioner may refuse or remove the right to hold a licence under the Firearms Act. While the loss of the regulatory permission to hold a licence under the Firearms Act is unlikely on its own to constitute a deprivation of property within the meaning of the right, the implication of the loss of a regulatory permission to hold the licence – and potentially also the prospect of holding a licence – is that the person is not permitted to possess, carry or use firearms, which may in turn impede their private property rights. Further, if a person whose licence is not renewed or cancelled does not dispose of their firearm, they will commit an offence under the Firearms Act.

This being so, the citizenship requirement introduced by this Bill is clear and certain, publicly accessible and is not, for the reasons set out above, arbitrary (capricious, unpredictable, unjust or unreasonable), in the sense of being disproportionate to the legitimate aim sought. Additionally, firearms can be used as a lethal weapon that are by their nature heavily regulated and restricted. The conditional nature of a firearms licence, including the prospect of holding one, are subject to statutory conditions that may be altered by statute. Accordingly, a person cannot reasonably hold an expectation that their property rights in relation to regulated items such as firearms are unconditional and everlasting.

I therefore do not consider the citizenship requirement, as introduced by Part 6 of the Bill, to limit the right to property in section 20 of the Charter.

Right to a fair hearing (s 24)

Section 24(1) of the Charter provides that a party to a civil proceeding has the right to have the proceeding decided by a competent, independent and impartial court or tribunal after a fair and public hearing. The concept of a ‘civil proceeding’ is not limited to judicial decision makers but may encompass the decision-making procedures of many types of tribunals, boards and other administrative decision-makers with the power to determine private rights and interests.

If a broad reading of section 24(1) of the Charter is adopted so as to apply to administrative decision-making that affects existing rights and interests, it may be said that the Chief Commissioner’s power to refuse to renew, or to cancel a licence, engages the fair hearing right. In my view these amendments will not limit the right as the exercise of the power will be subject to procedural fairness and adequate review.

The Bill imposes a duty on the Chief Commissioner to take an administrative action, being to cancel a licence, if the Chief Commissioner forms the required state of mind. The Bill affords procedural fairness by requiring the Chief Commissioner, after forming a reasonable belief that there are grounds to give written notice of the matter to the licence holder and invite the licence holder to cancel a licence, to comply with a series of procedural requirements, which include serving a notice, inviting and considering evidence that they satisfy the citizenship requirement or are exempt from the licensee, and forming a state of satisfaction within 28 days after the notice is served.

Further, new sections 46C(5), 76B(5) and 76C(5) provide for a non-prohibited person to apply to the Firearms Appeals Committee for review of the decision to cancel a firearms or dealers licence, including for failing to comply with procedural requirements or where the Chief Commissioner ought to have been satisfied on the evidence that the individual satisfied the citizenship requirement or was exempt from that requirement.

I therefore consider that Part 6 of the Bill is compatible with the right to a fair hearing in section 24(1) of the Charter.

Firearms background checks

Part 7 of the Bill concerns firearms background checks and introduces the additional requirement that all persons who hold a firearms licence must hold and maintain a firearms background check within the meaning of the Commonwealth AusCheck Act 2007 that does not include an adverse criminal intelligence assessment or an adverse security assessment. The Bill prohibits the Chief Commissioner from issuing or renewing a firearms or dealers licence to a person unless the person is subject to a firearms background check under the AusCheck scheme that does not include an adverse assessment. The Bill also requires the Chief Commissioner to cancel a firearms or dealers licence on becoming aware that the holder of the licence is subject to aa firearms background check under the AusCheck scheme that includes an adverse criminal intelligence assessment or an adverse security assessment.

Right to property (s 20)

Clauses 39 and 43, which insert in sections 42(2) and 73(1) of the Firearms Act the requirement that the Chief Commissioner refuse to renew a firearms or dealers licence where the applicant – and in the case of a dealers licence, all the responsible persons in relation to that application and persons employed in the business – does not satisfy the firearms background check requirement, engages the property right in s 20 of the Charter for the same reasons as discussed above in relation to the citizenship requirement.

Similarly, clauses 40 and 44, which insert in sections 46 and 76, and clause 45, which inserts new section 76C, introduces the requirement that the Chief Commissioner cancel a firearms or dealers licence where the applicant – and in the case of a dealers licence, all the responsible persons in relation to that application and persons employed in the business – does not satisfy the firearms background check requirement, does for the same reasons as discussed above in relation to the citizenship requirement, engage the property right in s 20 of the Charter.

For the same reasons as set out in the above discussion on the property right in relation to the new citizenship requirement, I do not consider the firearms background check requirement, as introduced by Part 7 of the Bill, to limit the right to property in section 20 of the Charter.

Conclusion

I consider that the Bill is compatible with the Charter as outlined in this statement.

The Hon. Anthony Carbines MP

Minister for Police

Minister for Community Safety

Minister for Victims

Minister for Racing

Leader of the House

 Anthony CARBINES (Ivanhoe – Leader of the House, Minister for Police, Minister for Community Safety, Minister for Victims, Minister for Racing) (15:10): Under the Statewide Treaty Act 2025, I table a statement of treaty compatibility:

In my opinion, the Bill is compatible with the objects set out in section 66(3)(d) of the Statewide Treaty Act 2025. I base my opinion on the reasons outlined in this statement.

Overview of the Bill

The Bill amends the Firearms Act 1996 (the Act) to progress reforms that will:

• ensure the continuation of the firearm prohibition order (FPO) scheme;

• make further provision for the categorisation of firearms;

• increase penalties for offences relating to trafficking of firearms and FPOs;

• impose a citizenship requirement and a background check requirement on the holding of a licence under the Firearms Act;

• make consequential amendments to the Firearms Amendment Act 2018.

Consultation with the First Peoples’ Assembly of Gellung Warl

Due to the recent establishment of the First Peoples’ Assembly of Gellung Warl, it was not possible to give the First Peoples’ Assembly the opportunity to advise on the Bill or for them to otherwise make representations about the effect of the Bill on First Peoples.

Compatibility of the Bill with each of the objects in section 66(3)(d) of the Statewide Treaty Act 2025

I have considered whether the Bill is compatible with the objects at section 66(3)(d) of the Statewide Treaty Act 2025:

advancing the inherent rights and self‑determination of First Peoples; and

addressing the unacceptable disadvantage inflicted on First Peoples by the historic wrongs and ongoing injustices of colonisation; and

ensuring the equal enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms by First Peoples.

Advancing the inherent rights and self-determination of First Peoples

In my opinion, the Bill does not in its terms deal with First Peoples, nor is it expected that any aspects of the Bill will, in practice, affect the object of advancing the inherent rights and self-determination of First Peoples.

While the Bill does not include any provisions that are explicitly directed at First Peoples, the Act which it modifies contains certain safeguards for the FPO scheme that are directly regarding First Peoples. These safeguards are relevant to the proportionality analysis regarding ensuring the equal enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms enjoyed by First Peoples below.

Addressing unacceptable disadvantage inflicted on First Peoples

In my opinion, the Bill does not in its terms deal with First Peoples, nor is it expected that any aspects of the Bill will, in practice, affect the object of addressing the unacceptable disadvantage inflicted on First Peoples by the historic wrongs and ongoing injustices of colonisation.

Ensuring the equal enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms by First Peoples

Apart from the amendments to make the FPO scheme permanent, the Bill does not in its terms deal with First Peoples, nor is it expected that any other aspects of the Bill will, in practice, affect the object of ensuring the equal enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms by First Peoples.

I note that the amendments to make the FPO scheme permanent engage a number of human rights protected under the Charter of Human Rights Act 2006 (Charter).

The FPO scheme is a civil prohibition order scheme that authorises the Chief Commissioner of Police (CCP) to make a discretionary order against an individual aged 14 years or more if the CCP is reasonably satisfied that it is contrary to the public interest for the individual to have access to a firearm or firearm-related item. The CCP may have regard to the criminal history of an individual, their behaviour or associates, and to criminal intelligence when exercising this discretion.

The impact of an FPO on an individual aged 14 years or more is significant. A person subject to an FPO is exposed to additional offences and extended police powers, including a prohibition on entering or remaining in a range of premises, a duty to surrender any firearm or firearm-related item to police, and exposure to additional search powers allowing a police officer to, without warrant or consent, enter and search the premises of the person subject to the FPO and to search any vehicle, vessel or aircraft that is in the charge of the person subject to the FPO or where they are a passenger thereof. A person subject to an FPO can be searched by a police officer to verify compliance with the FPO and can be detained for as long as necessary for the search to be conducted. Persons accompanying a person subject to an FPO can also be searched.

The FPO scheme commenced in 2018, limited to operation for period of 10 years, and was expressed to be a response to an urgent and pressing threat to public safety and order, deferring consideration of the need for an ongoing scheme to a future parliament.

As the Bill will make the FPO scheme permanent, it engages Charter rights regarding the operation of the scheme, including those rights identified as engaged when the FPO scheme was first introduced in the Firearms Amendment Act 2018. These rights include the right to privacy (section 13), the right to protection of children (section 17), the right to property (section 20), the right to freedom of association (section 16(2)), the right to fair hearing (section 24), the right to freedom of movement (section 12), and the right to protection against self-incrimination (section 25(2)(k)).

Although the Bill does not include any provisions that apply specifically to First Peoples, I note that despite efforts under the Closing the Gap National Agreement and related efforts under the Aboriginal Justice Agreement, First Peoples remain significantly overrepresented across the criminal justice system. The Yoorrook Justice Commission’s Yoorrook for Justice report found this was in part driven by a ‘pattern of systemically racist policing’ noting that while this ‘does not characterise the whole of policing in Victoria, it is widespread and ingrained’.

I further note that First Peoples are marginally overrepresented as a proportion of the population subject to FPOs. In the period from 2021 to 2025, a total of 1885 FPOs were issued, with 7 percent of all FPOs issued against an individual identifying as an Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander. First Peoples accounted for less than 2 percent of the Victorian population in the relevant period.

Considering the impacts that the discretion and significant powers under the FPO scheme have on human rights generally, the overrepresentation and bias faced by First Peoples in interactions with police generally, and the overrepresentation of First Peoples subject to FPOs, I note that the Bill’s amendments to make the FPO scheme permanent and the resulting ongoing potential for the disproportionate application of the FPO scheme on First Peoples, may result in the unequal enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms by First Peoples.

While the Bill may limit the achievement of the objects in section 66(3)(d)(iii) as outlined above, in my opinion the limitations are proportionate and therefore compatible with these objects. In particular I note that:

the Bill applies universally to all individuals, not specifically or only to First Peoples;

a FPO can only be made if the CCP is satisfied that it is in the public interest to do so because of the criminal history of the individual; because of the behaviour of the individual; because of the people with whom the individual associates; or because, on the basis of information known to the CCP about the individual, the individual may pose a threat or risk to public safety;

the Bill has been developed to reform Victoria’s firearms regulatory scheme and provisions of the Firearms Act 1996 that target illicit firearms to comply with National Cabinet’s imperative to take strong, decisive and focused action on firearms law reform following the Bondi Beach terrorist attack on 14 December 2025;

the FPO scheme is subject to a stringent independent oversight regime by the Independent Broad-Based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC) which includes biennial ministerial reports reviewing the FPO scheme, a general power to monitor and report on the exercise of powers and the performance of duties and functions of the CCP and members of Victoria Police regarding the FPO scheme, and the review of a representative sample of cases where an FPO is ordered;

the Act also includes specific provisions to protect First Peoples within the FPO scheme including requirements that:

when a Magistrate is considering whether to issue a search warrant for service of an FPO they may have regard to whether there is likely to be any First Peoples at the premises at the time of the search;

the Victorian Aboriginal Legal Service is notified when certain police powers regarding FPOs are exercised in relation to children (aged 14 to under 18 years of age), including:

when a police officer is reasonably satisfied that a service direction determination applies to a child and directs them to remain in place or go to a police station or other safe place, and

as soon as practicable after detaining a child under an FPO service search warrant;

the CCP must make written records of searches under FPO service search warrants that relate to First Peoples;

IBAC has broad powers to monitor the use of police powers relating to FPOs and the CPP must report to IBAC every three months on certain matters, including regarding all First Peoples who were the subject of service direction determinations and service search warrants under the FPO scheme; and

a range of data regarding FPOs and the exercise of FPO-related police powers must be included in the Victoria Police annual report.

Conclusion

For the reasons set out above, in my opinion the Bill is compatible with the objects specified in section 66(3)(d)(i) to (iii) of the Statewide Treaty Act 2025.

The Hon. Anthony Carbines MP

Minister for Police

Minister for Community Safety

Minister for Victims

Minister for Racing

Leader of the House

 Anthony CARBINES (Ivanhoe – Leader of the House, Minister for Police, Minister for Community Safety, Minister for Victims, Minister for Racing) (15:10): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I ask that my second-reading speech be incorporated into Hansard.

Incorporated speech as follows:

The Victorian Government is unwavering in its commitment to ensure the firearms industry operates safely and only those who are licensed and have a legitimate reason can access a firearm. The Firearms Amendment Bill 2026 (the Bill) continues our focus on improving firearm safety and protecting the community from the dangers of serious and organised criminals, while at the same time balancing the interests of legitimate firearms users including our recreational hunters, sports shooters and primary producers.

The overarching purpose of Victoria’s Firearms Act 1996 (Firearms Act) is to give effect to the principle that the possession, carriage, use, acquisition and disposal of firearms are conditional on the need to ensure public safety and peace. Keeping Victorian’s safe is the Government’s number one priority and this Bill further demonstrates this, including through increasing penalties for offences under the Firearms Act that target serious and organised criminality and keeping firearms out of the hands of the wrong people.

The amendments in this Bill have been carefully developed in the context of National Cabinet’s decision to take strong, decisive and focussed action on firearms law reform following the abhorrent, antisemitic terrorist attack at Sydney’s Bondi Beach on 14 December 2025. The development of this Bill has been informed by the Rapid Review of Victoria’s Firearms Laws, conducted by Mr Ken Lay AO APM. On 25 May 2026 the final report on the Rapid Review of Victoria’s Firearms Laws as well as the Government Response were released publicly. That same day, the Premier made the Government’s position on immediate firearms reform clear – through this Bill the Government is making it even harder for a gun to fall into the wrong hands.

This Bill does not place any cap on the number of firearms that individual firearms licensees can lawfully have. The Government recognises the legitimate need for sectors of the community, such as primary producers, professional and recreational hunters, and sports shooters, to lawfully possess, carry and use firearms. Firearms licensees are subject to extensive regulatory scrutiny with the vast majority of firearms owners being law abiding members of the community. Amendments in this Bill will enhance Victoria Police’s regulatory toolkit to ensure this continues to be the case.

I turn now to the detail of the reforms in the Bill.

The Bill introduces a citizenship requirement for firearms licensing which will be satisfied by an individual who is an Australian citizen, a New Zealand citizen who is an Australian permanent resident or an individual of a class that is prescribed by the Regulations to satisfy the citizenship requirement. The Bill exempts an individual from the citizenship requirement if they reasonably require a firearm to earn a livelihood or they are an individual in a class that is prescribed by the Regulations to be exempt from the citizenship requirement.

These new citizenship provisions will come into effect on a date to be proclaimed. This will enable a number of elements to be progressed first, including a review of the Firearms Regulations 2018 to further refine the application of the amendments, work by Victoria Police on an upgraded firearms licensing system, and the Commonwealth work to establish the AusCheck scheme. I anticipate the precise proclamation dates will be in line with other jurisdictions and reflect ongoing national dialogue.

The Bill introduces a Commonwealth firearms background check requirement for firearms licensing that will leverage Australian Security Intelligence Organisation – ASIO – and Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission – ACIC – national intelligence information through AusCheck. Once the provisions come into operation, an AusCheck criminal history check will be required for all new firearms licence applicants and existing licensees when they next seek to renew their firearms licence. Additionally, the relevant intelligence agencies and Victoria Police may initiate an own motion check outside of the licensing cycle if new information comes to light suggesting an individual may pose a security or organised crime risk.

AusCheck currently provides background checks for critical infrastructure workers in Australia, specifically determining eligibility for unsupervised access to secure areas in the aviation and maritime industries, in national health facilities, major national events and security-sensitive critical infrastructure sectors. AusCheck provides its background checking services through a legislative framework established by the AusCheck Act 2007 of the Commonwealth and supporting Regulations. The Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Firearms and Customs Laws) Act 2026 of the Commonwealth, which came into force on 21 January 2026, laid the foundation for a new Commonwealth background checking framework for firearms licensing leveraging the AusCheck agency and expanding its remit to ensure that Commonwealth intelligence can inform firearms licence decision making in every state and territory.

The amendments in relation to citizenship and allowing for the additional use of national intelligence information to underpin firearms licensing are two key initiatives agreed by First Ministers at National Cabinet on 15 December 2025. This action immediately followed the Bondi terrorist attack and is a significant development in Australia’s approach to firearms regulation that are largely nationally agreed in principle at this time.

The Bill repeals provisions of the Firearms Act and the Firearms Amendment Act 2018 relating to Firearm Prohibition Orders (FPOs) that were to sunset on 8 May 2028, 10 years after their original commencement. These amendments will enable Victoria Police to continue using FPOs as an invaluable tool for disrupting serious and organised criminals and keeping firearms out of their possession into the future. The Bill does not in any way change the substantive nature of the FPO scheme, which will continue with the same features beyond 8 May 2028.

Since 2018, the FPO scheme has played an important role in Victoria Police’s ability to detect and disrupt illicit firearms offending. The FPO scheme operates together with the existing prohibited person scheme under the Firearms Act to target individuals who want to possess, carry and use firearms for entirely unlawful proposes. As a civil prohibition order scheme, the FPO scheme was anticipated to be a gamechanger in driving down firearms harm when it was first introduced, and this has proven to be the case. As of May 2026, Victoria Police has issued 2,788 FPOs with a cumulative total of 2,017 charges having been laid related to FPO breaches under specific FPO powers. When Victoria introduced FPOs only a few Australian jurisdictions had implemented such a civil scheme; now almost every jurisdiction has legislated its own FPO scheme, largely consistent with Victoria’s.

A person who is subject to an FPO is exposed to prohibitions and penalties that do not apply generally to any other citizen. Those prohibitions and penalties can be imposed on an individual if the Chief Commissioner is satisfied that it is in the public interest to do so because of the criminal history of the individual, or because of the behaviour of the individual, or because of the people with whom the individual associates, or because on the basis of information known to the Chief Commissioner about the individual, the individual may pose a threat or risk to public safety. An FPO must be served on an individual to be enforceable against them.

The Victorian Government has already demonstrated its commitment to giving Victoria Police the powers it needs to use the civil FPO scheme effectively. Amendments to the Firearms Act that came into operation in November 2024 addressed issues raised by police regarding FPO subjects avoiding service of the orders. Those amendments empowered the Chief Commissioner to make a service direction determination to authorise police to stop and detain a person in a public place and direct the person to attend a police station to effect service of an FPO. The amendments also allowed for the issue of a service search warrant by a magistrate, enabling police to enter premises to serve an FPO subject, and persons may be served with an FPO by registered post if they are detained or imprisoned. This Bill now makes the FPO scheme a permanent policing tool in recognition of its criticality in the ongoing proactive disruption of serious criminal activity associated with the illicit use of firearms.

The Bill additionally increases the maximum penalties for the 5 offences relating to FPOs to modernise Victoria’s penalty levels in light of equivalent offences introduced by some other jurisdictions more recently and having regard to the seriousness of these offences. Relevant offences prohibit the individual from acquiring, possessing, carrying or using a firearm or any firearm related item, offences for failing to notify the Chief Commissioner of a change of address, offences for entering or remaining on premises where firearms are located, and offences for failing to surrender a firearm or firearm related item when the FPO is served. The Bill also increases the penalties that apply to a third party who, knowing that an individual is subject to an FPO, disposes of a firearm or a firearm related item to the individual subject to the FPO. These amendments will ensure that Victoria’s FPO offences will have some of the strongest penalties in Australia.

The Bill introduces graduated offences and penalties for the existing firearms trafficking offences. The Bill imposes harsher and more suitable penalties for possessing, acquiring or disposing of traffickable and large traffickable quantities of firearms to reflect the grave risk to community safety presented by unlawful trafficking in firearms outside of the legitimate licensing system. The amendments will insert new definitions for large traffickable quantity of firearms and traffickable quantity of firearms into the definition section of the Firearms Act to apply an important distinction between a traffickable quantity of firearms, meaning at least 2 but no more than 9 firearms, and a large traffickable quantity of firearms, meaning 10 or more firearms, for the purposes of the existing offences under section 7C and 101A of the Firearms Act.

In relation to the firearms trafficking possession offence under section 7C of the Firearms Act, the amendments will mean that if a person possesses a traffickable quantity of at least 2 but not more than 9 firearms not in accordance with the Firearms Act or the regulations, that person commits an offence carrying a penalty of 1200 penalty units or 10 years imprisonment. However, if a person possesses a large traffickable quantity of 10 or more firearms not in accordance with the Firearms Act or the regulations, that person commits an offence carrying a penalty of 1800 penalty units or 15 years imprisonment.

Similarly, in relation to the existing firearms trafficking offence under section 101A of the Firearms Act, the offence is reshaped to continue the prohibition on the acquisition or disposal or a traffickable or a large traffickable quantity of firearms, and applies the harsher penalty of 1800 penalty units or 15 years imprisonment where a person acquires or disposes of a large trafficable quantity of firearms within a period of 12 months not in accordance with the accordance with the Firearms Act or the regulations.

Finally, the Bill also creates greater flexibility for the Chief Commissioner to temporarily recategorise firearms to better enable police to respond to emerging firearms technology of concern. The Bill clarifies and extends the legislative mechanisms to temporarily recategorise a firearm or type of firearm. The existing power to make an interim declaration under section 3A of the Firearms Act will be extended to authorise the Chief Commissioner, after consulting with the Minister, to make a temporary declaration to change the category of a firearm or type of firearm (other than an antique handgun or a black powder handgun). The exclusion of antique handguns and black powder handguns reflects the unique and historical nature this class of firearm, and the comparatively lower risk to public safety presented by this class of firearm.

The expansion to the section 3A discretion is designed to enable Victoria to respond quickly to changes in firearms technology, and potentially to implement national decisions to quickly recategorise a firearm or a class of firearm, until amending Regulations or other legislative reform is complete. Accordingly, the Bill extends the regulation making power to authorise regulations to prescribe that a class of firearm in a specified category of firearm is in a different category of firearm for the purposes of the Act.

National consistency in firearms categorisation is a fundamental aspect of Australia’s federated firearms regulatory scheme. Victoria is actively participating in the renegotiation of the National Firearms Agreement between the Commonwealth and states and territories as announced by National Cabinet on 15 December 2025. Any further consideration of firearms categorisations will be informed through this coordinated national process.

I commend the Bill to the house.

 James NEWBURY (Brighton) (15:11): I move:

That debate be adjourned.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.

Ordered that debate be adjourned for two weeks. Debate adjourned until Thursday 2 July.