GROVES, Mr Chris, Chair, Farming Systems Committee, National Farmers' Federation PARKER, Dr Chris, Senior Adviser, Cattle Australia [15:58] CHAIR: Welcome. Do you have any comments to make on the capacity in which you appear? Mr Groves : I am a farmer from between Cowra and Canowindra in the Central West of New South Wales. Dr Parker: I'm also a primary producer at Murrumbateman. CHAIR: Although the committee does not require you to give evidence under oath, I should advise that this hearing is a legal proceeding of the parliament and therefore has the same standing as proceedings of the respective houses. The giving of false or misleading evidence is a serious matter and may be regarded as a contempt of parliament. The evidence given today will be recorded by Hansard and attracts parliamentary privilege. Do either of you have an opening statement or any remarks this afternoon? Mr Groves : Thank you for the opportunity to appear today. The NFF acknowledges the terrible events at Bondi Beach in December. We believe there is no place for such violence and that type of hatred in Australia. This bill covers a wide range of issues, from antisemitism to extremism to firearms. The NFF's role is to ensure that farmers have the tools they need to do their jobs properly. That's why today we can speak about the parts of the bill that relate to firearms and how firearms are a critical tool that we use to uphold our on-farm biosecurity. They're also a critical tool in animal welfare. The NFF supports sensible reforms that strengthen community safety. We recognise that the intent of this bill is not to restrict the lawful and safe use of firearms in agriculture; however, it is vital to ensure that law-abiding farmers who rely on firearms as an essential tool for food and fibre production do not face any unintended consequences from rushing the process. Thank you. Dr Parker : We also acknowledge the terrible events at Bondi in December. We need to ensure that action taken to avoid these sorts of things in the future is appropriate and doesn't have unintended consequences. Firearms play a legitimate and essential role in Australian agriculture. They are critical for best practice animal welfare, and they're also critical for controlling invasive pest animals and pests that threaten biosecurity—something that would cost the nation an enormous amount of money, as I know you're aware, Chair. They're also important to securing food security and protecting our ecosystems. Their use is already highly regulated, and farmers take their responsibilities under these regulations extremely seriously. We should not have any unintended consequences. We would like the committee to have this at front of mind in your deliberations over this exposure draft. These unintended consequences are exacerbated by both the speed and the size of this omnibus bill. Thank you. CHAIR: Deputy Chair. Mr THOMPSON: Thank you both for joining us today and acknowledging the tragedy that happened in Bondi. My view is that the terrorist attack that happened at Bondi is not a gun issue and that we're here because of radical Islamic ideology. We and the people I represent in farming areas in Townsville feel adversely punished. We've heard commentary about getting rid of belt-fed shotguns, which don't exist. My question to you is: as farmers, as people from the land, what do you and the people you represent think about the changes to the gun legislation? Do you have any insight from your people on how this could adversely affect you? Mr Groves : One of the main things is that, as farmers, we need to be able to access a wide range of tools to do our job, and something that we are a little bit concerned about is rushing through legislation that may have unintended consequences. We have a process that we need to go through to have policy, but most of NFF's policies and NFF's charter for operation is just ensuring that food and fibre production in Australia can continue and be done without unnecessary impediments. In terms of the tools we need—we have shovels, we have chainsaws—we need firearms. It just fits in the category of something we need to have access to to conduct our businesses. Mr THOMPSON: I can only assume that people from the city want to tell us about what's happening in the bush. Before I hand over to the next committee member, I want to say thank you for what you guys do. From the paddock to the plate, it means a lot. And I really appreciate your input on this very significant issue today. Mr Groves : Thank you. We'll take that back. CHAIR: Senator McDonald. Senator McDONALD: Mr Groves, I've had a number of farmers and graziers contact me about the different sorts of firearms that they utilise for different measures on their properties. I've been concerned that some of the rhetoric has become very 'people who don't like guns versus people who either utilise them for work or recreation or choose to own guns or be licensed for guns'. So I thought we should start by asking you to speak to the different styles of firearms that farmers and graziers might need, whether it be for pest control or whatever. If you would, speak to that, please. Mr Groves : Certainly. It's interesting, for the way we farm in Australia, there's a wide range of firearms needed—different types, different categories. As you said, it depends upon what pest animal you're dealing with. Sometimes there needs to be the ability to reload fairly quickly—if you're in the scenario of pig hunting, for example. Then, in the other case, there's what we've seen in Victoria over the last few days with the horrendous bushfires that have gone through. Access to firearms and access to ammunition—small-bore rifling, things like that—have been critical in ensuring that the cleanup after those fires has been as expedient as possible. An animal suffering with burns is something that nobody wants to see, and nobody wants that animal to have to live any longer than they need to. There is a wide range of firearms, and they do all serve a purpose in various scenarios. Senator McDONALD: Some people have contacted me with concerns that the use of ammunition reloading equipment would become illegal—is proposed to be restricted under importation. Are you aware of any concerns raised about that? Mr Groves : At the moment we're not across a lot of the detail. As everyone has said, this has been a fairly quick process. Even the fact of us being here today has only come along from yesterday. So we're unsure, at the moment, of the ramifications for firearms. We do reload on our own farm at home. That is a money-saving venture; it's also an accuracy factor. Once you start talking grams of powder and weight of projectiles and all that—we can load a particular shell to suit the rifle that we have. It is a science; it's not just, 'Whack a bit of powder in and put a pellet in the end and hope for the best.' Any limitations on that would be problematic in certain scenarios. But, as I said, we're unaware of the detail at the moment and we need to look at the various legislations—the various state legislations as well—to see what the ramifications will be of what is being proposed or passed already. Senator McDONALD: The department tells me that they didn't consult with farming groups in the preparation of this legislation. Did anybody reach out to you in any forum or format to consult on this? Dr Parker : Cattle Australia certainly wasn't consulted in regard to this. We represent about 56,000 levy payers around the country, the vast majority of whom would own firearms for use as a tool on their property. I do note that the NFF, after the fact, have been offered a briefing, but I understand that that's at this time when we're appearing. So this is rushed. This is a challenging environment for organisations like ours to be able to get out and consult with members appropriately. That is not withstanding the absolute tragedy of the events that occurred, and it in no way detracts. Our comments today about ensuring no unintended consequences for producers who need a particular tool, because of an appalling event that happened in Bondi, need to be taken in that context. We are in no way opposed to action being taken by the government across a range of areas to deal with what is clearly an issue for Australia at the moment. Our view, and what we're talking about, is simply one component of that, which is the firearms component, and what we would like to see is the government and this committee keeping unintended consequences in mind. Your reloading question is a good example where that may well be the case, and I'm sure that was not an intended consequence of this gun legislation. If it is, then we will have something quite strong to say about that, given the need for a range of people to be able to reload their own ammunition and to ensure that they have cost-effective tools available to them. Senator McDONALD: Thank you, Dr Parker. I've just spent time in flood affected North Queensland, and we've just talked about the fires in southern Australia. The use of different kinds of firearms has been a very necessary part of managing animal welfare in those places. I'm concerned, though, about the mental health of farmers, graziers and recreational shooters. I'm getting a wave of people contacting me, saying that they feel that they are being disenfranchised and that their livelihood and their preferences are under attack. Indeed, earlier this afternoon, we had evidence from somebody who said that six per cent of the population shouldn't determine what the rest of the population's views were on firearms. My biggest concern is that farmers and graziers and so forth will consistently be patted on the head and told: 'Don't worry. This won't change anything you do.' But of course it's the straw that breaks the camel's back. They're feeling under attack and misunderstood. Anyway, that was a very long statement. Would you speak to what the views are of the farming organisations and the cattle organisations on exactly this matter? Mr Groves : Unfortunately, farmers have had to get used to being under attack. We're under attack from various aspects all the time. Sometimes it's legislative; sometimes it's ill-informed groups that don't like what we do. What you're saying about feeling under attack once again is something that we want to represent our members on, and the NFF's members are the organisations around Australia that have the farmers as their members. We are basically the next level up from representing the farmers, but we get information from every farmer organisation around the country. Yes, there will be this feeling of asking, 'Why should we have to give anything because none of our people did anything wrong?' That is a feeling that may become common around regional and rural Australia, but we also need to be responsible citizens and realise that something does need to happen because of the tragic scenario we saw in Bondi. We are representing our members and trying to make sure that it doesn't affect our ability to do business. We also have to monitor it and point out to people that, yes, something has to happen, but we are not the ones that should have to give up our equipment that we need to conduct our businesses just because of what happened. It's a double-edged sword. We need to be aware of what happened and probably make the appropriate adjustments that are needed, but we also certainly need to be aware that we're not limiting agriculture to produce feed and fibre. Dr Parker : There is a feeling, I think, that the series of reforms following Port Arthur have not even been completed. We don't have a national firearms register, which is one of the more important reforms from those that were put in place in my view. So I think there's a feeling of thinking, 'Here we go again with a whole lot of reforms and a whole lot of changes when governments haven't even implemented the last lot of changes.' So, again, I think there is a level of angst—I wouldn't say anger or anything like that—out there. As Chris said, people recognise the responsibilities to manage their own firearms, their legal firearms—which is a tool they need—in an appropriate fashion. But we'd also like to see, where reforms are put in place, that they're completed before more reforms are put in place. On top of that, we'd like to see that there is evidence that the current laws are being enforced appropriately because it appears to me, as a concerned observer, that there may have been some challenges with the manner in which legislation and those gun laws have been both administered and enforced. If we can be part of improving things, we welcome that opportunity. It is pretty hard to have that opportunity when we were told to appear here yesterday, and where we don't even have a necessary briefing that sits around what is a very complex piece of legislation that doesn't just involve firearms, as I'm sure you know. You've been hearing today and yesterday about the whole range of other issues covered in this omnibus bill. Senator McDONALD: I think your point about making sure that existing legislation is properly utilised before we go and introduce more legislation is well made. I think that's something that will certainly come out during the royal commission. We will wait to see the results of that. Some of the recommendations, or suggestions, that have been coming through, in addition to this framework of firearms buyback are around gun storage and the national register, which, as you've already raised, was something recommended some time ago which hadn't been actioned by government. Are you hearing elements that you think are useful? Whilst everybody is absolutely in shock and horror about what's happened, I don't think that, to date, there have been changes to legislation identified that would have prevented the tragedy or that would have been necessary, given the existing legislation that's in place. What I'm looking for from you is: do you have recommendations that you would like to see progressed? Mr Groves : At this early stage we haven't even been able to bring our members together. There have been a few phone calls around the country to get a basic agreement on where we are. As I said earlier, our policy is all about making sure that farmers can conduct their business. But, given where this is leading to, I think we need a lot more time to look into the detail and work out the exact ramifications of what is being passed. Also, bear in mind that all our members have state legislation that they have to look at, and they have to look at the ramifications of that as well. It's a hell of a job. It is a big job to get around and make sure that all this legislation is covered and that we see every detail in the depth of the legislation. As well, legislation is great, but how it's implemented is what we have to consider and look at. It's going to take a lot of time. It's one of those things that we need to consult on. We need to have committees get together and form policies, where we can then go forward and pursue those policies, to make sure that nothing that comes out of this legislation will impede our ability to continue on as we are. Chris? Dr Parker : I don't have any specific recommendations for this committee. Again, that's a function not of my lack of desire but simply the speed with which this is moving and the ability to get the level of detail that's going to be required for appropriate consultation with members of Cattle Australia and levy payers. It is worth remembering that current laws are really some of the most restrictive, if not the most restrictive, in the world. There is a significant cost and regulatory burden associated with those laws. We need to ensure that any modification or change to those laws doesn't add further to that regulatory and cost burden. I apologise, but, as we've both said almost ad nauseam, these are important and vital tools. I have personally had to put down sick livestock. I've personally shot vermin. These are not pleasant tasks, but they are essential tasks. They are essential tasks that primary producers do, on behalf of the nation, in producing food, fibre and grain. I recognise that there are lots of people in this country who don't like guns and who have no experience of guns. Maybe that's a success of the Port Arthur reforms. In fact, I would say it's a good thing that we've seen such small amounts of gun crime in this country since those reforms. But that doesn't take away from the fact that there are parts of our production system that require these tools, and there are already laws in place that law-abiding Australian producers abide by every single day, as do I. They're under lock and key and separated in two different places, two different gun safes, at my property, and we all do those sorts of things. Thank you. Senator McDONALD: One thing that I am conscious of is that, with farmers and graziers, while there is a separation between talking about recreational gun ownership, sporting, target shooting, social aspects and all of those other things, we have to be careful. If we separate gun ownership into people who can use them for a job and then abandon everybody else, that seems to me to be an unhappy landing place, because so many farmers and graziers have the ability to also enjoy recreational shooting, hunting, target practice and all of those things because they have access to land to do that on. How do you support those kinds of people who live in cities who either have a cultural interest in recreational hunting or, during COVID, discovered the shortages of fresh meat and still enjoy hunting? There are a number of reasons why people might enjoy owning a firearm. Yet it seems to me that, if we're not careful, we're going to separate people into 'need it for work' and 'everybody else doesn't get one'. Could you speak to that? Mr Groves : It is something that government will need to be very careful of. We, as a farming community—a lot of our younger people do have an interest in hunting, and it is an off-farm thing. It's not so much a side issue but something I learnt today. There's a long-range target team being sent overseas to represent Australia. I think 78 per cent of the competitors are farmers or employed in the agricultural industry. It is a recreation for a lot of young people in the rural and regional areas. I'm unable to speak to—and I'm not sure how you get around this one—people in the city who still have an interest in it. There are organisations, like the sporting shooters associations. The firearms retailers also have an organisation—SIFA. I'm not sure what that acronym stands for, but they have their own organisation which is also actively trying to engage at the moment with all of their members. We speak on behalf of the farmers and the farming community. As I said, our members are the various organisations around the country, and we are concerned by their point of view. But you have definitely raised a very valid point. A lot of these people who just have an interest in red meat procurement and things like that—there's a whole section of society there that will probably need to be looked at so that we're not alienating them or painting them as some sort of evil force. Senator McDONALD: That's right. We have a parliamentarian who was a Commonwealth Games participant in target shooting, and I think that is an exceptional skill—one that I don't share, unfortunately. I will finish on a couple of other questions because I know the chair is short of time, but I want to ask you if you have turned your mind to the buyback scheme and fair compensation not only for firearms but also for all of those ancillary items that I know a number of people would have—optics, ammunition, reloading equipment? We've touched on projectiles, magazines, spare parts, mounts et cetera. Mr Groves : If our farming community is being asked to give up something that they've had to pay for, then yes. There definitely needs to be compensation. But the thing is that, once again, we're not sure of the final details. We don't know how the buyback scheme will work. We are just asking that we can keep consulting with the lawmakers and the legislators—or the instigators of that legislation. If we can keep consulting, if this process has to happen, we can make it as smooth a transition as possible to this new world that we're aiming for. Senator McDONALD: We know that a number of firearm dealers have had difficult times. A number of the banks have tried to debank them. I'm really concerned that their businesses are under threat because of people now not being confident about buying goods from them. Of course, most of these are based in regional places. No doubt, you'll be keeping an eye out for them and representing their views as best you can, if required. Mr Groves : We do. I spoke to our local firearms dealer this afternoon in Cowra. They are really considering their future, because he said sales have dropped since December. He said, 'We have just seen a complete drop-off in sales.' They are questioning their future, and, I would say, so is every retailer of hunting equipment in any regional town, because, really, it's a world of uncertainty for them at the moment. Senator McDONALD: It's death by a thousand cuts, isn't it, Dr Parker? Mr Groves : It is. Dr Parker : And we just need to ensure the actions of a deranged few are not, in any way, set to change the ability of law-abiding citizens to use the tools they need for both their recreation and their work. We wouldn't want to see a distinction between those two functions. They are law-abiding citizens, abiding by the laws of the land and abiding by the gun laws. I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to purchase a firearm after going through the appropriate checks and the appropriate licensing to enjoy what is still a legal activity in this country. I do note, as you've pointed out, it's still used in competition in both the winter and the summer Olympics and the Commonwealth Games. These are important parts of this country's culture and heritage and also people's enjoyment of life. Senator McDONALD: Alright. Thank you so much, both to you, Mr Groves, and to you, Dr Parker, for coming to provide evidence at probably less than 24 hours notice on legislation that you've not had an opportunity to digest and certainly weren't consulted on. Thank you for your engagement this afternoon. CHAIR: Are there no other questions from other members? Alright. Thank you very much, gentlemen, for your time today. And, if there was any information that we've requested, I'm sure you'll provide something to us by the end of today. .