WEDNESDAY 17 JULY 2002

MR COLIN GREENWOOD

  60. So I would not be in any way offending you if I called you a voice for the gun lobby because that would be a reasonable description, would it not?
  (Mr Greenwood) You would be offending me because I go back to my pet word of today which is "logic". If I make a statement and cannot produce the evidence, you should ignore it because gun control, like all these social controls, is capable of logical approach and that has been noticeably absent in firearms legislation. The first legislation was introduced because the government of the day was afraid of a revolution in 1920 and the Cabinet diaries make it very clear. From that day on, we have never had a piece of logical firearms legislation. Nobody has said, "What is the problem?" and "Set your problem out" and "Now, here is a solution addressed to that problem" and then the third stage should be in a couple of years' time, "Let us see whether our solution has influenced that problem." That has never been done. I think I should perhaps declare another interest in that I spent 25 years in the police force. I have looked down the wrong end of a gun and a very close friend of mine was shot dead by a burglar. So, I would not want to be called the voice of the gun lobby although I sometimes say the sort of things that they want to hear.

  61. It is unlikely that you have been associated with making statements against the interests of the gun lobby. I think that would be fair, would it not?
  (Mr Greenwood) I hope that I am simply making statements which are logical.

  62. You mentioned earlier that you are a member of the British Shooting and Conservation Association. Are you familiar with their publication Young Shots?
  (Mr Greenwood) I have seen it; I would not be able to quote it to you offhand.

  63. So you know that the standard format of the publication is to display pictures of children with their guns and the quarry that they have killed.
  (Mr Greenwood) Yes.

  64. And that part of the publication is quite an aggressive marketing campaign to recruit more `young shots'?
  (Mr Greenwood) Yes.

  65. How many children in Northern Ireland would you like to see recruited as young shooters or young shots?
  (Mr Greenwood) However many are interested.

  66. No limit on the age, no limit on the number?
  (Mr Greenwood) How would you put a limit on it? The number of people who are interested in shooting in Northern Ireland is bound to be greater than in England and Wales because Northern Ireland is predominantly rural. In rural parts of Britain, children are very interested in shooting: children go out beating and children involve themselves in the sport before they participate. If they are going to participate properly in a disciplined environment, I most certainly would not put a limit to it. If you are, as perhaps you might be, advancing the proposition that guns are bad things, then I would disagree with you absolutely.

  67. I would advance the proposition that guns are potentially dangerous things, they shoot people and they injure people and therefore I am anxious to see proper controls around them. So, you say that as many children as want to be involved would be appropriate. You said earlier that you were very much in favour of supervision although you had doubts about tests or at least tests in certain situations. What definition of supervision exists at the moment?
  (Mr Greenwood) I think "supervision" is fairly well defined in the dictionary.

  68. That is very clever but what I am asking is, in terms of someone who is supervising a child with a gun, what are the requirements of supervision at the present time? Are there any?
  (Mr Greenwood) You smile at my reference to the dictionary but where a word in legislation is not clear, the dictionary—

  69. But there is no legislation covering supervision, is there?
  (Mr Greenwood) There is.

  70. It is a matter for the gun club.
  (Mr Greenwood) No, no, no. Supervision is mentioned in the Act and it is also mentioned in the Home Office Guidance. Supervision, in my view, involves being in a position to do something and to give instruction. In other words, it has to be quite close.

  71. Mr Greenwood, are you aware of any guidance that says what the proximity or the relationship of the person who is doing the supervising should be to the person who is being supervised? Are you aware of any guidance that says what the training of the supervisor should be? Would it not be the case that I would not need to possess a firearms certificate and maybe need not necessarily have ever fired a gun myself but I could technically be responsible for supervising a youngster doing so? Is that not the case at the moment?
  (Mr Greenwood) Would you not feel happy to do that with your own son or daughter?

  72. No, I take the view that people who are supervising hazardous activities should have training, minimum experience and expertise over that in order that supervision can have some meaning. Otherwise, I think it is an empty statement.
  (Mr Greenwood) The conditions of approval for rifle clubs lay down specific requirements: one to one supervision of non-members and so on. So, that is pretty well taken care of. There is nothing specified for clay pigeon and game shooting except the word "supervision" and I think I have already said that I would add to that that the supervisor should be totally liable. He should carry the responsibility in law as well as—

  73. But not necessarily be trained or experienced?
  (Mr Greenwood) I look back and think how I was trained. I did not go through a formal course of training as a youngster. I spent some time with a fairly heavy-handed grandfather but that is all. He did not have any qualifications. In the community in which we shot, if you were not safe, proper and so on, you were excluded. I know of no problems arising from the point you are making. It has worked very well for centuries.

  Chairman: Those are all the questions that we have for you. Mr Greenwood, thank you very much for coming to help us.