Thread: What I got from gunstuff as an email, police looking to charge for paperwork

8><-----
In the last 5 days information has come to light, that parliament are looking to pass an amendment to the Policing Act 2008 to enable them to charge for a number of Police “demand services”.

Though the Police have previously alluded to such a process being 'looked at', to date most firearms groups were not aware that this process had already begun.

The issuing of Permits to Procure and Permits to Import under the Arms Act seem to meet the criteria of 'demand services' as do applications for Firearms Licenses and Endorsements!

In Short - if you or anyone else in New Zealand wanted to import firearms, parts of firearms OR change/renew your firearms license OR apply for a permit to procure a pistol, MSSA or other restricted firearm in future - the Police are looking to charge us - the Taxpayers - for this service which is currently free.

This appears to be a blatant attempt at cost recovery from the shooting public who are already paying for the Police to provide these services as dictated by the Arms Act, and if it passes - this will only mean higher prices for shooting consumables, accessories, parts and complete firearms in future; as retailers will have no choice but to pass these increased costs onto consumers.

So make your voice heard and make a submission!

Shooters have until the 5th of February to send in submissions challenging any potential extra future charges!

We strongly encourage all shooters to make a submission!

The following is the link to the process of making a submission:

http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/sc/make-submission/51SCLO_SCF_00DBHOH_BILL13189_1/policing-cost-recovery-amendment-bill"

Yet more stealth tax by the back door.

Anybody know any more?

What is annoying is there is no list I can see of what will be charged and how much.

Steven, You will need to look at the amendment Bill when it goes to parliament to find out the proposed classifications and charging regime.
Its only a proposal at the moment. Its way off being a law.

Sounds about right to me.

Just before Christmas in Hastings they made the Firearms Officers position redundant and laid off the non sworn Staff member who has been doing all the firearms licencing since the 1980's.

The sworn officer who has picked up these duties has no idea how to perform these duties and it is plain these duties are not his first priority.

Cheers
Pete

Done.
The more people that make a submission now the better. Easyer to stop it now then later

Originally Posted by P38

Sounds about right to me.

Just before Christmas in Hastings they made the Firearms Officers position redundant and laid off the non sworn Staff member who has been doing all the firearms licencing since the 1980's.

The sworn officer who has picked up these duties has no idea how to perform these duties and it is plain these duties are not his first priority.

Yup, that's pretty common. Like traffic, front line Police staff are moving to jack of all trades rather than specific roles.

Now here's an observation.

Looking at it objectively, it's unrealistic to expect such a low cost of getting/having FAL to cover any eventuality of Police work we require, for 10 years. Despite the millions of dollars paid by the 200,000+ shooters received by the Govt by us for getting/having a FAL over the last 10 years , it's pretty obvious the actual $126.50 cost doesn't cut it. Nor the extra $200 for endorsements.

Like I said, if it's looked at objectively, the actual costs simply aren't being covered by the user. I'd expect the same model applied to a raft of other activities - fishing, drivers license, etc that has Govt, or council, or Iwi input, or any group that doesn't have unlimited funds.... Does't make it right, but it is the reality of the world we live in. A look at the health system is a great way to get an understanding of just how increasing costs just aren't being covered, and the money has to come from somewhere.

User pays.

Just an observation

Well if they had left them as life time licences they wouldn't have all this extra work!

Originally Posted by Kscott

Yup, that's pretty common. Like traffic, front line Police staff are moving to jack of all trades rather than specific roles.

Now here's an observation.

Looking at it objectively, it's unrealistic to expect such a low cost of getting/having FAL to cover any eventuality of Police work we require, for 10 years. Despite the millions of dollars paid by the 200,000+ shooters received by the Govt by us for getting/having a FAL over the last 10 years , it's pretty obvious the actual $126.50 cost doesn't cut it. Nor the extra $200 for endorsements.

Like I said, if it's looked at objectively, the actual costs simply aren't being covered by the user. I'd expect the same model applied to a raft of other activities - fishing, drivers license, etc that has Govt, or council, or Iwi input, or any group that doesn't have unlimited funds.... Does't make it right, but it is the reality of the world we live in. A look at the health system is a great way to get an understanding of just how increasing costs just aren't being covered, and the money has to come from somewhere.

User pays.

Just an observation

As long as any charges are REALISTIC (now there's a term that govt departments have a problem understanding), I see no real issue with a fee being charged.

Could someone who's a lot smarter than me make template of a simple submission so we can all easily stick our name on it and send it in?
Or not work like that?

As long as any charges are REALISTIC (now there's a term that govt departments have a problem understanding), I see no real issue with a fee being charged.

What is realistic though?

For example:
The CAA medical assessments recently went from $0 to $313, and that fee is either annual or biannual dependant on the applicants age for a Class 1 certificate.
The CAA hourly charge out rate also increased from $130/hour to $284.
Yes, these days the user pays, but those kinds of price hikes for a government department are a tough pill to swallow.

Originally Posted by Beetroot

Could someone who's a lot smarter than me make template of a simple submission so we can all easily stick our name on it and send it in?
Or not work like that?

If they receive submissions that contain the exact same text but are signed by different people then only the original submission counts. So you're best to write your own.

Originally Posted by Ryan

If they receive submissions that contain the exact same text but are signed by different people then only the original submission counts. So you're best to write your own.

Kindof... they have the option of counting it as only one submission (and they tend to stretch the definition a long way to avoid counting submissions against them), but if its agreeing with them they will still count them separately.

Who me, cynical?

I object to paying for a shitty service.

Well look at this this way, you already are.

The question is, will we be paying for a worser service

Originally Posted by Moutere

What is realistic though?

For example:
The CAA medical assessments recently went from $0 to $313, and that fee is either annual or biannual dependent on the applicants age for a Class 1 certificate.
The CAA hourly charge out rate also increased from $130/hour to $284.
Yes, these days the user pays, but those kinds of price hikes for a government department are a tough pill to swallow.

Well, those charges are FAR from realistic IMHO.
How much work is involved in issuing an import permit? Check license, write bugger all down, stamp, sign, done (never applied for an import permit so have no idea what they have)?
The current $200 (ish) for an E or B endorsement seems fine, how much more could it cost for what extra benefit?
If there are no dedicated arms officers, who is going to actually understand the law? I have experienced a couple of cops who don't know and shouldn't have ANY involvement with firearms at all (seen the roof above a shooting range after some cops have been there?)