 |
Legislative
Council |
|
 |
||
| Ian Gilfillan Australian Democrats Member of the Legislative Council |
Parliament Index |
|
|
Legislative
Council |
|
|
||
| Ian Gilfillan Australian Democrats Member of the Legislative Council |
Parliament Index |
|
In reply to Hon. IAN GILFILLAN (4 May 2000).
The Hon. K.T. GRIFFIN: The Minister for Police, Correctional Services and Emergency Services has been advised by the Deputy Commissioner of Police of the following information:
1. Why have the promises of 22 January not been kept? When will they be kept?
SAPOL still intends establishing stolen firearm information on a web site. Delays have occurred due to the need to establish security protocols, obtain the appropriate authority and introduce procedures. It was anticipated that stolen firearms information would be in place; however, the complexities being encountered with respect to security, while still ensuring the recovery of stolen firearms, has extended the implementation time.
2. If the police cannot afford a $1 500 database, why is there no police phone hotline available for the same purpose?
The cost of the database is not an issue. Staff at firearms branch already receive phone calls from the public questioning whether or not a firearm is stolen. These calls are made to the firearms branch number listed in the phone book and so there is no need for an additional hotline number.
3. Why can buyers of cars check whether a car is stolen but buyers of guns cannot make a similar check?
The ultimate aim is to provide this information on a web site with respect to firearms. However to ensure that the information is accurate and to ensure we do not assist in the trafficking of stolen firearms, there is a need to consider a number of complex issues, both legal and administrative. Currently, members of the public wishing to purchase a particular firearm can and do telephone the firearms branch to question whether or not the firearm has been reported stolen.
