We’ve launched a legal challenge to a refusal by our registries
to come clean on what they’re up to on the national stage.
Prefer the Gun News Australia version?
Watch the full interview – click the image below.
The FOI long game
AFTER NEARLY A YEAR of battling bureaucracy, Politics Reloaded is on the verge of uncovering what new gun laws and policies our nation’s firearm registry managers are pushing for.
These meetings, under the federal government’s Firearms and Weapons Policy Working Group (FWPWG), have long raised concerns among shooting organisations because of the secrecy that surrounds this group.
The firearms policy group
The FWPWG includes representatives from all Australian states and territories, as well as federal agencies such as the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission, the Australian Federal Police, the Australian Institute of Criminology, the Department of Home Affairs, and the Defence Export Control Office.
The only information that the group publishes is that its primary objective is to facilitate improved national consistency in response to firearm and weapon issues.
While similar groups exist among senior public officials in other portfolios, this one lacks any form of transparency.
It publishes no minutes. It publishes no agendas. It does not invite the very sector (the shooting sector) that it affects.
That’s why Politics Reloaded has targeted the FWPWG with a series of Freedom of Information (FOI) requests. FOI is known in other states as Right-To-Information, Right-To-Know and Government Information (Public Access).
Our FOI requests sought access to documents, such as minutes, that related to policy discussions and policy advice – because this ends up as being recommendations to state and territory governments to change our gun laws.
This started nearly a year ago, has cost a lot of money and involved dozens of emails with the relevant agencies. We’ve kept this under wraps – until now, because it’s starting to bear fruit.
The FOI challenge
One of the key FOIs is the one that went to the NSW Police because of the way FOI’s work in that state.
The NSW Police Force denied the request, stating that there was an “overriding public interest against the disclosure” of the information.
The refusal was based on concerns that releasing the documents could compromise the effectiveness of the police force’s functions, such as investigating and preventing crime.
They argued that they had to avoid releasing the documents to “stay one step ahead of criminals”.
However, we never asked for that information: we asked for documents that pertained to policy discussions and advice. Not once did we ask for operational information such as details of investigations – or on criminals.
What is particularly telling is that at no stage did NSW Police raise these concerns with us. Our request was specific and clear.
While investigations may provide background to discussions, our request was clear and agreed to – until they tried this smokescreen.
Dodging transparency and accountability
The response set out the principles that guide consideration of FOI requests. Among them are the need for transparency and accountability by public bodies such as our police forces.
That’s because public agencies need to be subject to sufficient public oversight. As the response says, failing to be transparent can erode public trust and hinder accountability – which, in our language, means politicians can lose their jobs.
Decisions made in closed settings will also inevitably lead to the wrong decisions being made.
In this instance, it is imperative that shooters be able to access and question the rationale behind firearm regulations and hold policymakers accountable for their actions.
Instead, it would appear some within NSW Police – possibly registry managers and policy representatives to the FWPWG – came up with the story about investigations and criminals for their FOI people to use, to avoid being subjected to transparency.
HOWEVER, we spotted this a mile away – and went straight to appeal. If that fails, then we’ll be off to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal – which is where this fight will involve real money.
We need to stop bias from driving public policy – and for shooters who want to see fights like this undertaken. This can be most effectively done by getting your support on Patreon (at patreon.com/PoliticsReloaded)
The FOI appeal
We have filed a formal appeal with the Information and Privacy Commission of NSW (IPC) with three main arguments.
The details of our arguments have been released to our subscribers on Patreon and members who helped to bankroll our work.
We’ve shown them the FOI response and the appeal we lodged.
If you would like to see our arguments – and like the work we’re doing – then sign up at Patreon now.
IF THE OUTCOME goes the way we hope, then we’ll be well placed to not only uncover what the FWPWG has or has not agreed on but put a stop the “policy by stealth” approach that several states have used, with their own unique attacks on shooters.
Examples include the recent ammo purchase attack in the Northern Territory, calibre attack Queensland, crazy new application form in Tasmania, and unexplained firearm reclassifications in Victoria.
Plus, don’t forget section 4 (2)(a) of WA’s atrocious new Firearms Act 2024, which states that one of the objectives of that new act is “to facilitate a nationally consistent approach to the control of firearms.”
That’s exactly what we reckon the FWPWG will be looking at now.
A SECOND FORMAL APPEAL in another state is likely to be made soon. We’ll be reporting on that one hopefully later this month.
That’s why backing Politics Reloaded makes sense …
Why not put this on your club’s noticeboard?
who are these persons that are directing the abolition of firearms from the general public and telling the shop front persons (police and politicians) what to do and how to get it done, they know who we are would it not be right to know who they are !!!!!