UPDATE: A parliamentary committee has just recommended that MPs debate the contentious NSW hunting bill, raising significant alarm among various stakeholders. As discussions heat up, a previous inquiry has cast doubt on the necessity of further investigation into the bill, leading critics to label it a “Trojan horse” for the gun lobby.
In a swift move, the committee gathered views from over 2,600 participants in a snap inquiry, but stopped short of addressing concerns regarding the $7.9 million budget allocation for the proposed Conservation Hunting Authority. This authority aims to represent licensed hunters and manage land practices, yet has drawn ire for its potential conflicts of interest.
The bill, introduced by Robert Borsak of the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers party, seeks to create a hunting authority that would liaise on land management issues. However, initial enthusiasm for the legislation has noticeably waned. Premier Chris Minns asserted that the government has been transparent about its shifting stance, emphasizing that any changes to gun laws must maintain public safety.
In a statement on Friday, Minns remarked, “It’s been put up by a minor party… and effectively we just have to call it when we see it.” His comments reflect a cautious approach, acknowledging the complex dynamics surrounding the bill.
Critics have voiced strong opposition, with RSPCA chief science officer Suzie Fowler arguing that the term “conservation hunting” merely disguises the realities of hunting practices. “It’s putting a different name on something to try and dress it up in a way that perhaps is more palatable to the public,” Fowler stated during the inquiry.
The emotional weight of the debate intensified when Walter Mikac, founder of the Alannah & Madeline Foundation and a survivor of the tragic 1996 Port Arthur massacre, condemned the proposal. “It’s not a system that’s broken – if anything, it’s been incredibly successful,” he declared, highlighting existing provisions for hunting in NSW.
Opposition has also emerged from various political factions. Nationals MP Scott Barrett expressed support for aspects of the bill but criticized the inquiry findings, which raised more issues than initially anticipated. Barrett pointed out that the allocated funds would not contribute to invasive species control, emphasizing the need for a more thorough examination of the bill’s implications.
The inquiry’s findings have led to a growing climate of skepticism, with some alleging backroom deals between the government and Shooters’ MPs to secure legislative support. The general public remains invested, as the outcome of this debate could significantly impact wildlife management and hunting regulations in NSW.
As MPs prepare for the upcoming discussions, the urgency for clarity and accountability grows. The public is keenly watching how this controversial legislation will unfold. With the health of ecosystems and the rights of hunters hanging in the balance, every voice in this debate matters.
Stay tuned for more updates as this story develops.
