Speaker, I rise to support this motion on behalf of the people of Bass. I speak with both sorrow and resolve. Last month, I travelled to Bondi to pay my respects in person. I spent the afternoon with the Chabad of Bondi community, meeting with Rabbi Yehoram Ulman, speaking with men and women of the congregation, and being guided through their shul, their synagogue. (more…)
The Tasmanian Government will increase protections for the State’s war memorials.
Liberal Member for Bass, Michael Ferguson, said recent incidents of vandalism in Tasmania and interstate were a stark reminder that threats to these sacred sites are real and growing. (more…)
After withdrawing from bipartisan support for mandatory precommitment in 2024, the Labor Party now claims it has held a consistent position on this policy.
This video sets out a clear timeline of Labor’s own public statements, showing how that position shifted over time. (more…)
The evidence is clear: mandatory pre-commitment reduces gambling harm by putting control back in the hands of players. It allows people to set their own limits in advance, deciding for themselves what they are willing to lose, and then gamble freely within those limits. For the vast majority of responsible players, nothing is taken away and there will no change to their expenditure unless they want it.
This is not a nanny-state approach and it does not remove freedoms. It strengthens personal responsibility and informed choice, while providing real protection for vulnerable people and their families. Making it universal matters, because it prevents loopholes and targeting of those most at risk.
Today the Government’s Deloitte report on into this proposed scheme was published for the first time.
The big news in the report is that Deloitte also finds massive economic benefits, including an estimated $230 million increase in Tasmania’s gross state product and 209 additional jobs under the medium scenario. This is the first time we’ve ever seen such an objective analysis.
I welcome the report and believe Tasmania should continue to progress this reform, consistent with the evidence and our past commitments. Every state and territory should do the same.
Follow this link to read the full report and form your own view.
Here are some key quotes direct from the report’s executive summary and a table from the economic analysis:
“The reforms are projected to cause a decline in activity and employment at venues, but this is more than offset by increases in activity and employment in other sectors. This trend is consistent across regions, but the magnitude is larger in regions with more EGMs”.
“While there may be a reduction in revenue for venues operating EGMs, the broader economic benefits include improved labour productivity due to reduced gambling-related absenteeism, enhanced household disposable income and reduced costs to government associated with delivery of healthcare, mental health support, homelessness programs, policing, courts, and corrections.”
“The proposed reforms are expected to lift Tasmania’s GSP and net employment, relative to the State’s economic baseline. This finding holds across each of the three scenarios.”
“The social outcomes of the reform are anticipated to be largely positive; an effectual consequence of the reform considering gambling related harm is not confined to problem gamblers. Firstly, the study shows that a meaningful reduction in gambling-related harm is expected, particularly among problem gamblers, moderate risk gamblers, and their communities. This reduction is then expected to lead to decreased demand for public health and social support services, decreased costs for justice and policing, improved productivity, and overall improvements in community wellbeing.”
“All industries are expected to benefit from the proposed reforms, with the exception of the EGM sector and the hospitality sector. In each scenario, higher economic activity stems from a combination of more available workers at higher productivity levels, due to a reduction in gambling among the workforce, and the substitution of EGM spending for consumption of other goods and services.”
All Tasmanian LGAs are expected to experience a neutral or positive deviation in gross regional product (GRP) as a result of the proposed reforms. The impacts are not uniformly distributed, with larger spending regions that have labour-intensive industries and a more diverse economic structure expected to receive the greatest economic uplift.”
“Launceston, Hobart and Glenorchy are expected to experience the greatest deviation in GRP, primarily attributable to their comparatively larger economies. The impact on smaller LGAs is expected to vary based on local factors, but none experience a net economic loss.”
In the aftermath of the tragic events at Bondi, I have received many calls and messages from our Bass community and from right around Tasmania asking what our state’s response should be to the firearms law proposals coming from Canberra.
This has been a deeply distressing time for Australians. We all feel the weight of what occurred. It is natural that people want to ensure our laws are strong, fair and effective.
My position as your elected Member of Parliament is clear. Tasmania’s focus must instead remain focused on keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals, without unfairly disadvantaging responsible, law-abiding firearms owners. By that I mean recreational hunters, farmers and sporting shooters who comply with the law and contribute positively to our community.
Any changes to firearms laws must be evidence-based, workable in practice and genuinely directed at improving public safety. Changes should not disadvantage legitimate firearm users.
Firearms laws can always be reviewed and refined. However, my strong view is that real reform should be targeted at the real risks. Broad regulatory changes that primarily affect licensed owners will not, on their own, address the core problem of illegal, stolen and unregistered firearms circulating in the community as a result of criminal activity and organised gangs.
If we are serious about reducing harm, our attention must increasingly turn to those illegal weapons, not simply to those already complying with the law.
Tasmania’s publicly stated position in the national context has been that any reform must be consultative, proportionate and fair. That is the right approach. Rushed, poorly targeted measures risk penalising legitimate firearm users without materially improving community safety.
We are carefully considering the federal proposals, but we are not simply agreeing to them. Minister Ellis and the Cabinet have emphasised a cautious and consultative process to ensure that any reforms are tailored to Tasmania’s needs and grounded in evidence.
Stopping terrorists and criminals must be the priority. That means improving intelligence coordination, accelerating delivery of the National Firearms Register and ensuring our enforcement efforts are focused where the risk is greatest.
Update: Firearms Consultative Committee Established
Since this was first written, the Tasmanian Government has taken a further step consistent with the approach outlined above.
Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Management Felix Ellis has appointed a new Firearms Consultative Committee to provide structured advice on firearms regulation and public safety.
The Committee brings together a broad range of stakeholders including TasFarmers, the Police Association, the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia, Medics for Gun Control, a firearms dealer, a recreational hunter and community representatives.
This is exactly the kind of calm, consultative and evidence-based process that should guide any reform. It ensures that decisions are informed by those with practical experience, community insight and frontline knowledge.
Importantly, Tasmania’s highest priority remains accelerating delivery of the National Firearms Register to strengthen intelligence sharing between jurisdictions and keep firearms out of the wrong hands.
Tasmanians have always come together in times of adversity. We can continue to do so now with a balanced approach that is firm on crime, fair to legitimate owners and focused squarely on improving public safety.
I welcome your views. Please feel free to comment below or contact me directly.
Michael
