| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Straw: I am sorry; I do not have time to give way.
I do not believe that the use of the word "revenge" against Conservative Members of Parliament is an acceptable tactic. It exposes some of the motives and the hysteria of the shooting lobby.
Mr. Carlisle:
On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Perhaps it would help the hon. Gentleman if I informed him that the words "revenge at the polls" were--
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Geoffrey Lofthouse):
Order. That was an attempt to intervene after the hon. Gentleman had refused to give way.
Mr. Straw:
It is good to know that the hon. Gentleman claims part authorship or knowledge of the letter, but what is on the record at the Internet site is not "revenge at the polls", just "revenge". [Interruption.] I gather that it has changed, no doubt because the association realised the error in its drafting.
In the hysterical reaction from some--not all--members of the shooting lobby, there has been a huge amount of disinformation about the likely position of the Government and the Labour party on the wider issue of the control of guns in our society. The Government must speak for themselves, but I believe that what is in the Bill, with the exception of the control of .22 calibre handguns, is proportionate to the problem.
The Labour party has never believed that such bans on the use of guns should be extended to shotguns. I make that absolutely clear. We respect the right of those who own shotguns for the control of vermin and for the enjoyment of country sports. We have no proposals to change that regime.
Miss Widdecombe:
As I have only four minutes left to reply, I regret that it will not be possible for me to address every single point that was raised.
My hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Kent (Mr. Rowe) suggested that there should be further delay because of growing public interest since the Bill was introduced. It has been a year since the tragedy at Dunblane, and it is quite right that the public should expect us to come forward with proposals to try, as far as possible, to avert any similar tragedy in the future, although it must be clear that that could never be absolutely guaranteed.
I entirely endorse what my hon. Friend said about the responsible nature of those who have interests in shooting. I have no doubt at all--nor have the Government--that the vast majority of people who shoot are law-abiding, decent citizens who can be utterly trusted and are utterly responsible. The fact remains that the problems at Dunblane arose through somebody misusing a gun that was lawfully owned and possessed outside a secure club.
Mr. Frank Cook:
That is not so.
Miss Widdecombe:
As the hon. Gentleman interrupts from a sedentary position, perhaps I can now come to his speech.
The hon. Gentleman recited a long list of matters that he said that we had neglected, but in today's debate, in Lords amendment No. 71, we shall address the issue of a central register. If he reads the Official Report of the Committee proceedings, he will see that we covered the issue of age limits. It is not true that a long list of matters have been ignored in the debate. Therefore, I reject his proposition that we need more time to discuss them, as many of them have already been discussed in some detail in Committee.
My hon. Friend the Member for North Thanet (Mr. Gale) raised a point about the transitional period for the holding of .22s by the police. The current schedule 1 to the Bill sets out a transitional period of a year for the holding of .22s, although that could be varied by order of the Secretary of State if necessary. I hope that that clarifies the matter.
Several hon. Members said that they wished to have longer to discuss compensation. That issue has been thoroughly rehearsed.
Two hon. Members mentioned the consultation document that we issued today. The hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) lamented the fact that there was not time to debate the document or to absorb it in any detail in time for today's debate. The document is, of course, intended for a much wider audience. It is not about what we are to implement or what the law should say, but is about how the implementation is to take place--
It being one hour after the commencement of proceedings on the motion, Mr. Deputy Speaker put the Question, pursuant to Order [18 November].
The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Michael Howard):
I beg to move, That this House doth disagree with the Lords in the said amendment.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Geoffrey Lofthouse):
In accordance with the allocation of time order just agreed by the House, Lords amendment No. 8 will be grouped with Lords amendment No. 12. We shall also discuss the Government motions to disagree with those amendments.
Mr. Howard:
The question of disassembly of handguns has been thoroughly discussed during the passage of the Bill both in this House and in another place. The Government's position has been and remains that small-calibre pistols in their complete form should be stored in secure licensed clubs. Allowing members of licensed small-calibre pistol clubs to keep the main body of the pistol at home and remove only a small part for retention at their club cannot in our view provide sufficient safeguards for the protection of the public.
Sir Cranley Onslow (Woking):
Has my right hon. and learned Friend addressed the opposite proposition that the body of the pistol should be kept at the club and a small part only retained at home?
Mr. Howard:
Yes. Indeed, it was canvassed as early as on Second Reading, when the point was put to me by--I think--the hon. Member for Great Grimsby (Mr. Mitchell). It is not the specific proposal contained in the amendment and I am rather doubtful about what purpose it would achieve. It would attract many of the disadvantages that the proposal specifically identified in the amendment would attract.
The Government entirely accept that members of pistol clubs licensed under the Bill would be overwhelmingly decent, law-abiding people, just as the members of pistol clubs that are allowed under the current law are overwhelmingly decent, law-abiding people. We have all, however, seen the appalling consequences that can ensue when a pistol owner is determined to perpetrate serious crime with his lawfully held gun.
Dame Elaine Kellett-Bowman (Lancaster):
The gun was certainly lawfully held, but the process by which Hamilton obtained the certificate was ludicrously slack. Had that man's record been considered by the police in granting the certificate, he would never have had the licence.
Mr. Howard:
I understand my hon. Friend's feelings. That was of course considered by the police, and Lord Cullen went into that aspect of the matter very carefully
Mr. Rupert Allason (Torbay):
Is not anybody who lies on an application form for a firearms certificate committing an offence? If a certificate is granted thereafter, is not that certificate, by definition, invalid? Was that not so with Hamilton? Is that not what Lord Cullen found? What did Lord Cullen recommend with regard to disassembly?
Mr. Howard:
I do not know quite what conclusion my hon. Friend sought to reach on the basis of the first part of his question. The certificate held by Thomas Hamilton was not declared invalid and was therefore quite valid until it had been revoked. I shall come to Lord Cullen's recommendations on the question of disassembly.
In considering their response to Lord Cullen's very thorough inquiry into what happened in Dunblane, the Government took the view that it was right if at all possible to allow the sport of pistol shooting to continue in some form, and the Bill allows for small-calibre pistol clubs, operating under a very high degree of security, to be licensed by the Secretary of State. The question is what should be done with the small calibre .22 handguns that are used at such clubs.
The Government propose that such guns should be kept at secure club premises. Amendments to the Bill in another place would allow club members to keep their handgun at home as long as some part of it was always removed and kept at the club. Under the amendments, that part would be the slide of pistols, the cylinders of revolvers or some other part to be specified by the Secretary of State.
As has been said so many times in discussion of this issue, it would be possible for handguns to be kept in a disassembled form. It is said that most owners of most handguns would be capable in practice of removing the vital part to leave at the club and fitting it again when they returned. The Government do not dispute that, but that is not the real question. The question is whether such a procedure would give the public a sufficient assurance against misuse of a handgun by a club member. The Government's view is that it would not.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |