TasFarmers Matters - Read the room on firearms

Political pundits will tell you there is no worse job in politics than being in opposition and, as the same school of thought goes, opposition must oppose every proposal put forward by the government of the day.

It’s apparent our state’s opposition feels compelled to live out this narrative, particularly where it can hold an emotive position contrary to the government’s on something like firearm caps. 

Good opposition needs to be more than just an opposing line. Political leaders need to navigate their constituency, meet with people, test their ideas and build leadership credibility.

This means it’s important to read the room.

In the immediate aftermath of the Bondi shooting, much of the federal political response focused on firearm buybacks and placing additional restrictions on licensed firearm owners, while failing to adequately confront the ideology, radicalisation and antisemitism that helped create the environment for such an attack.

The result has been a sustained argument from rural and regional Australia that legal firearm owners are not the problem, and that no evidence has been presented to show caps on legal ownership would address the real issues.

Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania and the Northern Territory have all rejected firearm caps, demonstrating that opposition to the policy extends across party lines.

Caps are an unpopular policy position handed down from Canberra which has not been adopted across much of the country.

The science and evidence behind firearm caps simply does not stack up.

Trying to adopt the policy within the capital, when constituents across the regions are telling you it is not what they want, makes little sense in a state where a significant proportion of the population lives outside the capital.

The opposition leader says Labor will now reintroduce the firearm caps amendment in the Upper House. This can only result in a return of the legislation to the Lower House. 

Tasmania’s Lower House has already voted, finding insufficient evidence that firearm caps would improve community safety. 

At what point does an opposition listen?

At some point, political leaders need to listen and stand up for constituents who are telling them they oppose the federal government’s approach.

The opposition is not in government and cannot govern from opposition. But it can demonstrate that it is capable of listening, responding to evidence and developing credible alternatives.

Opposition rhetoric must be restrained and reasonable if a party is to be taken seriously and wishes to be viewed as a credible alternative government.

Rather than blindly following the federal line, and falsely assuming that introducing further restrictions on licensed, law-abiding firearms owners will prevent future acts of terrorism by those who do not abide by the rules of law, our opposition should hold to its previous commitments of no caps and develop evidence-based policy directed at the real causes of community harm, including radicalisation, antisemitism and violent extremism.