Victoria’s new outdoor recreation agency sparks debate over promoting shooting sports to children

Legislation before the Victorian Parliament proposing the creation of a new outdoor recreation super agency has ignited debate after the state government confirmed the body would have the authority to encourage children as young as 12 to participate in recreational shooting under Victoria’s existing licensing laws.

Outdoor recreation debate in Victoria over junior shooting sports

The proposed authority, to be known as Outdoor Recreation Victoria, would combine the Victorian Fisheries Authority and the Game Management Authority into a single organisation responsible for regulating fishing, hunting and a broader range of outdoor recreational activities across the state. Alongside its regulatory functions, the new agency would also be tasked with increasing participation in outdoor recreation, including licensed shooting sports.

Outdoor Recreation Minister Enver Erdogan acknowledged that the agency would have the capacity to promote shooting to young people who are legally eligible to participate under Victoria’s firearms licensing framework.

That confirmation has prompted strong criticism from several child safety and animal welfare advocates, who argue the proposal sends the wrong message about firearms at a time when governments continue investing heavily in violence prevention initiatives.

Sarah Davies, chief executive of the Alannah & Madeline Foundation, questioned the consistency of allowing government-backed promotion of junior shooting while Victoria continues imposing strict restrictions on children’s access to social media.

“It is concerning that a 13-year-old cannot use Facebook, yet they can legally use guns,” Davies said, arguing there was little public benefit in encouraging greater participation by minors in firearm-related activities. She also expressed concern that the structure of the new agency could allow industry interests to outweigh broader public safety considerations.

Animal Justice Party MP Georgie Purcell also criticised the proposal, warning that taxpayers should not fund campaigns encouraging children to become involved with firearms.

Purcell argued the legislation could eventually allow promotional activities in schools or other educational settings, describing the possibility as deeply concerning given increasing public sensitivity to gun violence.

She compared the proposal with the Victorian Government’s existing Little Anglers program, which introduces schoolchildren to recreational fishing, asking whether similar publicly funded initiatives could one day be developed for junior shooting sports.

The Allan Government has rejected suggestions that the proposal weakens Victoria’s firearm safety regime.

A government spokesperson emphasised that Victoria Police licensing requirements remain unchanged. Teenagers wishing to participate in recreational shooting must obtain a junior firearms licence from Victoria Police, hold a junior game licence where required and remain under the direct supervision of a licensed adult whenever using a firearm.

The government said these activities are already lawful forms of sport and recreation, and that Outdoor Recreation Victoria’s role would include education about compliance as well as enforcement against unlawful conduct.

Supporters of junior shooting sports argue the controversy overlooks the extensive safeguards already built into Victoria’s licensing system.

Family First said comparisons between supervised shooting and unrestricted social media use were misleading because junior shooters are subject to licensing, adult supervision and strict legal controls every time they participate. The party argued organised shooting sports have long been family-oriented recreational activities in many regional communities and can help develop discipline, responsibility and safe firearm handling under controlled conditions.

The Sporting Shooters’ Association of Australia has similarly argued that structured junior participation promotes safety through education rather than encouraging irresponsible firearm use. Supporters also point to hunting’s role in controlling feral animal populations and protecting agricultural land and native ecosystems.

Opponents remain unconvinced.

They argue that, regardless of existing licensing safeguards, using a government agency to actively promote participation represents a significant policy shift from regulating lawful activities to encouraging greater firearm use among minors.

The proposal has also become politically contentious because it arrives amid broader debates over public safety, youth wellbeing and the influence of interest groups on government policy.

The Victorian Greens criticised the legislation, arguing that the state should prioritise cost-of-living pressures, housing affordability and stronger gun safety measures rather than creating a body capable of promoting shooting sports to children. The party also questioned whether the move reflected the influence of firearm advocacy groups on public policy.

The legislation does not alter the minimum licensing age or existing legal requirements governing firearm ownership and use in Victoria.

Instead, the controversy centres on the promotional role that Outdoor Recreation Victoria would be permitted to undertake once established.

Political analysts note that the debate reflects a broader philosophical divide.

Supporters view supervised shooting as a legitimate recreational activity comparable with fishing, archery or other outdoor pursuits conducted under strict regulation. Critics believe government resources should not be used to encourage children to participate in activities involving firearms, regardless of existing safeguards.

As the legislation continues through Parliament, the discussion is likely to remain focused on where governments should draw the line between promoting lawful recreational activities and protecting broader community expectations around child safety and public health.

Related Posts

Editorial illustration of Steven Miles and David Crisafulli in Queensland politics

Steven Miles Challenges Crisafulli Over Child Safety After Amanda Camm Quits

Queensland Opposition Leader Steven Miles has challenged Premier David Crisafulli to appoint an experienced replacement for Amanda Camm after she announced her decision to step down from the child safety and domestic and family violence portfolios. Miles says the choice will reveal how seriously the government takes services for vulnerable children and families. Crisafulli has praised Camm’s record and defended the reforms initiated during her term. Camm says her decision was personal and followed major surgery and an incomplete recovery. She has also referred to the stress of her ministerial workload and the impact of public harassment. Her resignation should not be portrayed as an admission that the criticism of her administration was correct. The policy dispute and the reasons she has given for leaving office are separate facts.

Editorial illustration of Sharon Freund and Michael Allen with courthouse imagery, not a photograph of proceedings

Judge Sharon Freund Challenges Watchdog Referral Amid Dispute With Michael Allen

NSW Deputy Chief Judge Sharon Freund has taken her challenge to a watchdog referral before the Court of Appeal amid a prolonged dispute involving Local Court Chief Judge Michael Allen. The latest proceedings concern whether decisions and observations arising from a Judicial Commission process were reached and handled lawfully. The legal contest remains unresolved, and the allegations at its centre must not be treated as disciplinary findings against either judge. Published accounts of the Court of Appeal proceedings say Freund’s lawyers have challenged the Attorney-General’s referral of her conduct to the NSW Judicial Commission. The dispute has been linked to questions about the handling of a criminal case involving a judicial colleague’s adult child and to competing allegations about procedural propriety. Those accounts remain contested, and the Court of Appeal’s task is not identical to a final disciplinary inquiry.

Editorial illustration of Angie Bell and Anne Aly, Australian parliamentary debate

Angie Bell Calls Stoning Remarks ‘Regrettable’ After Anne Aly Criticism

Liberal frontbencher Angie Bell has described her earlier parliamentary remarks about Small Business Minister Anne Aly and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese as regrettable, calling them a poor choice of words after a furious public dispute over violent imagery in political debate. Bell says the comment was neither helpful nor planned, and that she withdrew it and tried to rectify the matter with Aly. The new statement follows criticism from Aly, who described the original language as racist and misogynistic. The exchange is significant not because the words have just been spoken, but because Bell has now publicly addressed them. Her expression of regret should be reported accurately without claiming that she accepted every criticism Aly made or that the parties have resolved their disagreement.

Editorial illustration of Nina Taylor and Fishermans Bend urban development

Nina Taylor Defends Fishermans Bend Plans as Rivals Demand Faster Transport

Labor MP Nina Taylor has defended the Victorian government’s approach to Fishermans Bend as rival candidates in the Albert Park electorate demanded faster public transport and better infrastructure for the growing inner-Melbourne precinct. The debate at a local election forum highlighted the gap between plans for a major urban renewal area and the transport connections residents and businesses can already use. Candidates questioned why promised tram and rail links remain distant prospects despite long-running plans to accommodate substantially more homes and jobs. Taylor pointed to recent planning steps, the Metro Tunnel and expanded bus services, while opponents pressed the government to deliver infrastructure earlier. The disagreement concerns priorities, funding and sequencing; a planning announcement should not be confused with a completed railway or tram service.

Editorial illustration of Angus Taylor and Chris Bowen with the Snowy 2.0 hydroelectric project

Angus Taylor Demands Chris Bowen Resign Over Snowy 2.0 Cost Blowout

Opposition Leader Angus Taylor has called for Energy Minister Chris Bowen to resign after Snowy Hydro revised the cost and completion forecast for Snowy 2.0, reviving a political argument over who is responsible for one of Australia’s most expensive energy projects. The company’s updated target is $22.2 billion, with an allowance for a cost of up to $25 billion, while commissioning is now expected in late 2029. The latest assessment is a major test for the Commonwealth-owned company and for governments of both political persuasions. Taylor was energy minister when the project was approved under the Coalition. Bowen, who oversees the project as a shareholder minister under Labor, says the early design and engineering assumptions left a lasting problem. Neither side’s political account changes the figures Australians now need to assess.

Editorial illustration of David Pocock and Anthony Albanese with parliamentary funding documents

David Pocock Challenges Albanese Over Helen Haines Funding Dossier

Independent senator David Pocock has challenged Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s explanation of a document circulated from his office about fellow independent Helen Haines, drawing a sharp distinction between routine political briefing and material that can cast doubt on an MP’s integrity. Albanese says the file concerned Haines’s requests for funding for her electorate and was not intended as a personal attack. The row has taken on particular sensitivity after the alleged vehicle attack that left Haines critically injured. That incident is the subject of a separate criminal investigation. No established evidence links the circulation of the political document to the alleged attack or identifies political briefing as a motive. Treating the two events as causally connected would go beyond the facts.