Firearms licensing
Mr QUILTY (Northern Victoria) (12:25): My question is for the minister representing the Minister for Police. In the minister’s last written answer to my question regarding the 100 000 misplaced firearms on the licensing and regulation division database, I was advised that number was left over from the old firearms database that ceased operation in 1996. I was told that an ongoing audit had reviewed 60 000 records, but there was no word on what those 60 000 reviews had found. The fact that errors go back to 1996 shows that the firearms database has not been properly audited in the previous 25 years. During that time firearms could have been seized by police on the basis of faulty records, hypothetically been sold or stolen by police and then claims made that firearms had been lost or destroyed, and the LRD records would be unable to provide evidence to the contrary. I have heard a number of allegations that firearms that the police have had in custody have vanished. Minister, how many firearms have gone missing from police custody since 1996, including complaints about them going missing that were later resolved?
Ms TIERNEY (Western Victoria—Minister for Training and Skills, Minister for Higher Education) (12:26): Can I say that I wish to take this opportunity to express my heartfelt condolences to those that have been affected by the dreadful shootings in America, and in particular the most recent ones. I understand that the death toll at the moment is hitting 18 people, many of whom are children, and I really do not think it is particularly appropriate to talk about guns today, to be quite frank. Having said that, there were a number of serious allegations, yet again, contained in Mr Quilty’s question, and I will refer them to the Minister for Police. But I would encourage the member to really contemplate and reflect on the content of his questions today, particularly given the circumstances that have occurred in the United States.
Mr QUILTY (Northern Victoria) (12:27): I thank the minister for her editorial, and I will comment that missing firearms may contribute to shootings. Minister, what is the process when VicPol loses a firearm in their custody and what investigatory action is taken? In particular I am eager to learn about how this process works when the police officer involved is a senior member of the licensing and regulation division and is the firearm portfolio holder at the registry. It appears that in this situation the process is as simple as making an affidavit and having a junior subordinate officer witness it. I have a copy of such an affidavit in my possession, and the officer who made it is Senior Sergeant Andrew Armstrong. In the affidavit Sergeant Armstrong claims that the firearms were accidentally destroyed by forensics. Surely the Victorian forensic service centre would be able to provide evidence to this effect so that we would not be forced to take the senior sergeant’s word for it. Sergeant Armstrong also takes care to mention that the firearms are of no monetary value. I wonder why he has done that. It is unlikely that five firearms have no monetary value, especially as at least one of those in question was a rare and valuable model. The affidavit is a curious document, and I look forward to the minister’s explanation.
Ms TIERNEY (Western Victoria—Minister for Training and Skills, Minister for Higher Education) (12:28): I will refer the matter to the Minister for Police.
Ms Pulford: On a point of order, President, it has come to my attention that the Victorian small business that Mr Davis was representing in his question earlier is actually a Queensland-based labour hire company, so perhaps I could seek some advice from you as to my ministerial responsibilities in relation to this.
Mr Davis: Further to the point of order, President, it is confirmed it is operating in Victoria and actually has worked on this government project. The fact is that its staff, the people that it has employed, have actually been left in a difficult position and are not being paid because of the miasma.
Ms Pulford: Further to the point of order, President, perhaps I might suggest, as a way forward, that I take this question on notice for the Minister for Corrections, who has responsibility for the delivery of the project.
Mr Davis: This is a business that is operating in Victoria and ought to be paid. If the minister is arguing that she can abscond and not have a role in that, well, good luck to her.
The PRESIDENT: We are not going to go into that. I was going to rule it from the beginning. Minister, sorry to say, there is no point of order. Even if it happens somewhere else, that is no point of order. We are not going to continue on this.