Conclusion

The Firearms Register and supporting systems have numerous weaknesses in the controls over data input, processing and reporting. As a result we have no confidence in the accuracy of basic information on the number of people licensed to possess firearms or the number of licensed or unlicensed firearms in Western Australia. In the absence of reliable information, WAP are unable to effectively manage firearms licensing and regulation in WA.

Background

Firearms licensing in Western Australia is governed by the Firearms Act 1973 and the Firearms Regulations 1974. Under the Act, a person wishing to possess or use a firearm must have a firearms licence. A licence may be issued to either an individual person or to a body corporate such as a security company.

To obtain a firearms licence, a paper based application form and supporting documentation is submitted to WAP electronically via Australia Post. The application includes the following information:

• Genuine reason – There must be a genuine reason to hold a firearm licence. This includes membership of a shooting club, recreational shooter or a collector. Licence holders may also have an occupational requirement such as a primary producer or security firm properly licensed under the Security and Related Activities (Control) Act 1996.
• Firearms awareness certificate – People who are applying for their firearms licence for the first time (original application) are required to complete a firearms awareness test. This is conducted at an approved firearm association or club and a 28-day cooling off period exists after submitting the application.
• Firearms serviceability certificate – All firearms subject to a licence application, or subsequent additions to a licence, must be accompanied with a serviceability certificate which is obtained by the seller.
• 100 point proof of ID
• Other supporting documentation such as:
  • where the licensee is a primary producer – proof of property ownership
  • where the licensee is not a primary producer – a ‘property letter’ from a primary producer allowing the licensee to use the firearm on their property for a legitimate purpose
  • where the firearm is to be used at a gun club – a club or association support letter
  • where the firearm is to be used for work – an occupational requirement disclosure, certificate of incorporation and registered business name.

Once approval of the application has been given by WAP, the applicant must provide photographic evidence of secure storage for the firearm. This must also be accompanied by a statutory declaration for the evidence provided. WAP will then proceed with the processing of the application prior to issuing a firearms license.

Police are responsible for:

• assessment of all applications for firearm licences and the addition of firearms to existing licences
• renewal and cancellation of firearms licences
• regulation of commercial organisations involved in the sale, manufacture and repair of firearms and ammunition
• retrieval of firearms as required

WAP is required by the Firearms Act to maintain a register of all licensed firearms. The register used is called the Firearms Registry System (FRS). The register includes a unique identifier for each firearm, information on who is licensed to use it, how it can be used, and where it must be stored.

We conducted performance audits on the management and regulation of firearms in 2000, 2004 and 2009. In each report we identified various problems with the systems and processes for the licensing and management of firearms in Western Australia. Our 2009 report raised specific concerns with the Firearms Register and related systems. The issues raised meant that WAP could not rely on the accuracy of the information held in the register.

Following the 2009 report the WA Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee requested WAP provide an update of progress for fixing the issues we had identified with the Firearms Register. WAP reported to the Committee in September 2011 that a stabilisation project was commenced in early 2010 and concluded in May 2011. The project cost was reported as approximately $720 000. WAP advised the Committee that as a result of the project the Firearms Systems are ‘stable, satisfactory and functional’.

We reviewed the Firearms Register and supporting systems to determine whether they were operating effectively.

Key findings

We identified some concerning issues that result directly or indirectly from the lack of reliable data and difficulties in accessing basic management information from the Firearms Registry System. These issues include:

Firearms not recovered from deceased estates – 988 firearms have not been recovered by WAP from deceased estates dating back to 1983. No records could be found in the Incident Management System (IMS) or Firearms Registry System (FRS) to ascertain if the firearms had been seized.

After a person passes away it can take up to 280 days before FRS is updated with this information so that WAP can commence with recovering the firearms. FRS is only updated when a renewal notice is issued not when they are deceased. During this time the firearms belonging to the deceased licence holder remain unaccounted for.

Use of template ‘property’ letters – a recreational firearm licence must have an accompanying (property) letter of approval from a property owner to use the licensed firearm on their property. There is no limit to the number of property letters that can be issued by an individual property owner. However, FRS does not have the capability to search or report on the number of property letters associated with each property.

During the course of our audit we became aware of at least one case where a person was sold a property letter by a firearms dealer so that they could apply for a firearms licence. As a consequence we sampled a small number of firearms applications and found that one property owner had provided property letters to over 270 applicants over the past 17 months. We noted that these firearms had all been purchased from the same firearms dealers. Similarly we found another case where over 80 property letters had been provided by the same property owner for firearms purchased from a single dealer.

WAP advised this practice is not illegal but acknowledge it is not in accordance with the intention of the legislation and expect this issue will be addressed through a proposed review of the Act. They further advised that the properties in question are a significant size, being 7 614 and 3 000 square kilometres respectively. As a safety measure one of the property owners maintains a register of when people shoot on their property. We note that a licence holder is not limited to using their firearm on the property listed on their original application once their licence is approved.

People assessed as unfit to have a firearm still listed as possessing them – over 300 firearm licence holders still had firearms listed against their licence despite being classified by WAP as unfit to possess a firearm. Reasons why people are classed as unfit to possess firearms include having a criminal conviction or being the subject of a violence restraining order.

We advised WAP of this issue during the course of the audit. They advised they were aware of it prior to our audit and had commenced a review to determine the accuracy of the information. At completion of our audit, they had followed up approximately 50 per cent of the ‘unfit to issue’ licence holders listed in the system and found no firearms in the possession of these licence holders.

WAP found in some cases a firearm had been seized but this had not been recorded in the system. In other cases the firearm was in the possession of a co-licence holder however again this was not recorded in the system.

Limited capacity for management reporting – FRS does not have the capability to produce simple management reports. For example in order to produce a simple report on the number of expired licenses a request for service needs to be submitted to another branch of WAP for it to be produced. We requested verification of previously reported firearms statistics. WAP informed us that this report would take more than five working days to process and indicated that they could not guarantee the accuracy of the information requested. As a result of these issues, staff manually create management reports in spread sheets.

Errors in updating information on the national CRIMTRAC database – we found over 25 000 instances where data could not be reconciled between the WAP firearms register and the national CRIMTRAC database. Of these, over 1 000 are linked to deceased estates and persons unfit to issue. The remaining 24 000 relate to the reason and conditions associated with the issue of a firearms licence. These errors are caused by data incompatibilities between the systems. This means the national database may not contain up-to-date or accurate records for WA firearms or licensees.

Nominated persons register – details of nominated persons who have access to firearms under a corporate license but do not require an individual firearms license are maintained in a spread sheet completely separate to the firearms register. There is a risk to the integrity of the information due to the possibility of unauthorised access, and there are no audit trails or history of changes. Data could also be lost due to human error.

Other issues we noted included:

Firearm identification card – we identified a number of concerns with Firearm Identification Cards including persons having more than one card, signatures missing from applications, photo of person did not match the license holder’s name, and cards with no details. Incorrect information on the cards creates a range of identity and security risks.

Workarounds and manual processing – manual processing is required for FRS to effectively operate. This includes the need to reconcile the accuracy of data back to IMS and other WAP systems and then manually change information as required. This process creates an increased risk of errors.

Access and logging – we found no policies or procedures in place relating to log access, changes and reviews of logs for databases. WAP use an application called Auditrak for logging user activities and changes. We found Auditrak’s usefulness to be limited because it only logs user activity made at the user interfaces of the relevant applications and not in the database or test environments that store this information. This means that unauthorised access will not be detected.

We also found that some of WAP’s Business Technology (BT) managers had ‘senior administrator’ access rights that were not required for their roles. These rights meant that the BT staff were able to read, delete or alter the firearm history of license holders undetected. The confidentiality of the data is also at risk.

Australia Post contract – when requested WAP were unable to provide the contract with Australia Post for firearms application processing, fee collection and letter printing. Without effective contract management, WAP may not be aware of costs and Australia Post’s obligations to meet agreed performance. Applications may be lost or not processed in the specified time.

Recommendations

Western Australia Police must:

• ensure that the integrity and timely input of information into firearms management systems is performed to ensure that firearms can be suitably managed
• ensure that business requirements for the new firearms management systems are adequately defined to ensure they support the business of managing firearms. Strong consideration needs to be given to management reporting. Good project management practices are essential from initiation to completion
• retrieve firearms from deceased estates promptly and ensure that the information is entered correctly into firearms management systems
• ensure effective verification of information and supporting documentation provided by firearms license applicants
• review controls for logging and monitoring of access and changes to back end systems including the Databases and Servers that support firearms management
• consider developing recommendations for amendments to the Firearms Act 1973 and the Firearms Regulations 1974.

Agency response

The Western Australia Police acknowledge the issues in the current Firearms Registry system, all of which Police have been aware of and responding to whilst developing the new Licensing and Registry system. Full implementation of the new system should address these issues, however is dependent on funds being made available. The Western Australia Police will continue its endeavour to improve its capacity and competence to fulfil its obligations under the Firearms Act 1973.