TUESDAY 29 OCTOBER 2002

MR DAVID ROBINSON, MR JOSEPH HUGHES, MR GORDON NEWELL AND MR ROBERT IRVINE

  100. Good afternoon, gentlemen. This is really to the Gun Trade Association, why do you consider the provisions of Article 4(4) to be unnecessarily exclusive?
  (Mr Robinson) The issue of referees is, in our opinion, a complete and utter waste of police time. It is a complete and utter nonsense. I would reassert that we have a system of issuing firearm licences which is second to none. It is a safe system. It is proven to be a safe system and it is about to be reinforced by the fact that the police force will be able to approach an applicant's GP for any relevant information regarding the guy's mental state of health. We have a proven, well run system that is going to be reinforced. My simple argument for the question of referees initially is, if I was applying to Mr Beggs for a job and he asked me for two referees I am not going to give him the names of two people who will tell him I am the biggest pratt they ever met. I am not going to do it, it is nonsense. The other argument is if it was introduced it is discriminatory again as it stands because say, for example, I happen to know the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom he is not eligible to give me a reference. In these days of global economy where we have people living and working overseas in Brussels if they are returning home they have to produce referees that have known them well for the last two years. What about ex-servicemen returning home, the people who may know them best are in Brunei, Hong Kong or Belize, so it is discriminatory at that level. Having said all of that our argument is they are a complete and utter waste of police time and unnecessary.

  101. In your submission you suggest that the processing of applications by the PSNI is prolonged and far more than is necessary, is the legislation responsible for these delays or is the problem else where? What are the concerns for your members?
  (Mr Robinson) This is a key issue for us. The problem within the police, which they are trying to address, is that local firearms enquiry officers do not belong to the head of firearms licencing, they belong to the local DCU Commander. The local firearms officer, who can cover a vast area with a large number of people, can be called upon to do gate duty, court service or prison service at the will of the local DCU Commander, he can be taken off to do other duties because he is only the firearms officer. In July you also have Drumcree and all these other issues that call on police time. One of the critical issues in all of this is the transaction known here in Northern Ireland as the one-on one-off. In England, Scotland and Wales you hold a shotgun permit, not certificate I add, you go into change that shotgun, it is done there and then by the firearms dealer, you give him the money because you are deemed to be a responsible person or you would not have the permit in the first place. One of the problems we have here with that transaction at the moment, and this is a major, major problem for us in all of this legislation, I do emphasise this point to you, gentlemen, we do want you to consider this very carefully, we would like to see the Chief Constable—you will see in the proposed legislation he is empowered to delegate some of his tasks to junior police officers and members of the support staff, given that the Chief Constable is the government's adviser in this province in terms of public safety and security it is inconceivable that the Chief Constable would delegate that to anybody for either public safety or security—being given the power to delegate clerical tasks to gun dealers, which frees up public money, police time and makes our life a lot easier in the sense that if you came into us we can now carry out the task bearing in mind you have already been authorised to hold a 12 gauge shotgun, you have a licence fo it, you can come into us and you carry out a transaction with us, we hand you over the shotgun, we very gladly take your money and we inform the Police Service that the transaction has taken place. This is nothing to do with authorisation, it is a clerical task and a critical issue to us.

  102. How is the person you have just sold this rifle to able to take it away then?
  (Mr Robinson) If a chap comes in he is not a first time buyer he is somebody who already holds a firearms certificate. You come in and want to buy a 12 gauge shotgun with the serial number 1234 and it is a Browning and you say, "I do not like this model I want a new model" I sell you a new model Browning with the serial number 1235, I take your old gun, I give you your new gun, I make the necessary entry on your firearms certificate and I then fill out a form informing the PSNI that that transaction has taken place. They go on to their computer, they make the necessary change to the computer and if they wish to carry out a security check they are free to do so, bearing in mind you had a 12 gauge shotgun in the first place.

  103. What is your objection to the new legislation?
  (Mr Robinson) Our objection to the new legislation is with the Chief Constable's legal advice he is not empowered to delegate clerical tasks to anyone who is not either a member of the police support staff or a police officer.

  104. Under this legislation you think that is going to change?
  (Mr Robinson) It is not going to change, that is our problem. We need the Chief Constable to be empowered to delegate clerical tasks as he sees fit, namely to us?

  105. I think you have really answered the question, what you are saying is that the Chief Constable at the present time if you have a rifle the same bore and you wish to change it then it cannot be changed without the permission of the Chief Constable and what you would like to see as a recognised dealer is if somebody wants a shotgun of the same caliber you could simply switch it over and that would save any time being taken.
  (Mr Robinson) That is absolutely right. We would not envisage the police force objecting in principle, what we are suggesting is to give the Chief Constable the power to introduce this step-by-step. If he introduced it say just for shotguns and air rifles, let the system run and when he is happy with the system you can do it for a 2.2 rifle, but initially let it run as a proven system initially just for shotguns and air rifles.

  106. We are not talking about Article 9 here, are we?
  (Mr Robinson) Article 9 refers to variations. Article 74 refers to power.

  107. In Article 9 you say that the dealers at the present time find themselves needing six weeks, eight weeks or 12 weeks before they can do this change and that impacts on the seller and the user. How do you suggest that the draft be changed in order to make it different, are you talking about a step by step approach?
  (Mr Robinson) Change his powers of delegation for clerical tasks. This is nothing to do with authorisation. The reason why we mention 9(6) is because it refers specifically to variations whereas Article 74 refers to his power of delegation. We are cross-referencing them. It is really what we are saying, empower him to delegate clerical tasks, he is the Chief Constable he is not going to let us do anything that he thinks unsafe. We say give him the power at his discretion whereby he can delegate clerical task. It does not necessarily have to be more specific than that. What we are referring to is the practice of one-on and one-offs.

  108. Just for the record, as regards the drafting of it to administrate it, to speed up the system what do you require?
  (Mr Robinson) If you take Article 74 where it refers to his powers of delegation to junior police officers and members of police support staff that is a third paragraph put in there stating he can delegate tasks to registered firearms dealers.

  Mr Tynan: Okay.

  109. Are there any other points any of you want to put to us before we bring this session to an end? I ask the Rifle Association first.
  (Mr Irvine) We have made our submission in draft form and I think it would be much better, rather than me doing a rush job, for you to take your time and read through it. We would submit there is a dangerous ambiguity, if not some conditions which are mutually exclusive in relation to the definition of firearms, and so on. In terms of the summary we feel, and we feel very strongly, that it is not necessarily to be taken as a reflection on the Northern Ireland team who did this draft but it is our opinion that the team that did this, and I know from talking to them, do not have any experience of firearms. They did not consult widely. They took advice on some issues which do not appear in the draft and some things they said they would take on board appear not to have been taken on board. We feel that since this draft proposal is going to effect us quite substantially that it is not the sort of thing that in the space of one hour we can make a full submission on. We would much prefer that this Committee looks through the draft in conjunction with the various submissions made and says to the Northern Ireland Office, if that is possible, that it would be preferable to set up a firearms consultative committee in line with what is in the rest of Great Britain to look at the draft proposals and to try to work out a much simpler, less bureaucratic system of firearms licensing, one which would shift the emphasis on the applicant. I think it is fairly clear from all of the various comparative studies with other countries across Europe and across the world that no matter what you do it is the person at the end of the day who is responsible for their own actions. We feel the emphasis should be taken away from routine, bureaucratic administrative tasks. It is a bureaucratic nightmare and we would much rather a consultative committee be set up with instructions that this time next year they would have a revised draft Order which had got the broad agreement of everybody involved in the process.

  110. Given that the draft has been published I think that might be wishful thinking. We will certainly study your revised submission and the Committee will come to its conclusion and report. Mr Robinson, do you want to say anything else?
  (Mr Robinson) In summary I think we all agree we put in a very fairly detailed submission to all of this but there are a couple of points I do want to re-emphasise to you that are of great importance: what we have just discussed, clerical tasks, that the Chief Constable can delegate; non FAC holders being able to use firearms under the supervision of an FAC holder, which is all part and parcel of the competency argument, because if a person is refused on the grounds that the Chief Constable does not think that he is competent there is nothing that allows him to go and become competent; the third issue is young shots. As much as I always enjoy touring England and Scotland I strongly object to our young people having to be sent there to be taught how to shoot, it is discriminatory against United Kingdom citizens. That is the end of our summary,

  Chairman: Thank you very much.

  111. Mr Robinson, a quick question from those of us who are distinguished only by their extraordinary ignorance of the subject, would you ever sell a hand gun for any other purpose than target shooting?
  (Mr Robinson) Yes, sir, for personal protection.

  112. Who would that be?
  (Mr Robinson) Somebody who is authorised by the Chief Constable, it could be a police officer, a prison officer or a member of the Royal Irish Regiment.

  113. Would they not be issued with a handgun?
  (Mr Robinson) No, not necessarily. For example say a prison officer is leaving the Prison Service today he would be allowed to take an issue weapon with him for one year, if at the end of the year it was deemed he still required a personal protection weapon he would have to buy his own. The other thing I would mention on the point of competency is that the Police Service of Northern Ireland refuse to train people in competency testing who hold PPWs, that is why our legal advice is that we can be held liable, the police know this and they will not offer it for somebody holding a personal protection weapon.

  114. Typically what size caliber would you sell for personal protection?
  (Mr Robinson) The most popular caliber for a personal protection weapon by nature is a 9 mm, whether it is a 9 mm parallel or a 9mm short.

  115. A 9 mm parallel, somebody would use that for personal protection?
  (Mr Robinson) If somebody is trying to kill you you have to kill them first.

  116. If somebody is trying to kill you you have to—
  (Mr Robinson) The reason why you are issued with a personal protection weapon is because special branch have said there is a specific danger against you. If somebody is going to kill me I want to kill them first without question. The nature of carrying a personal protection weapon is it would by nature be generally small in size because carrying a handgun in Northern Ireland if it was too big or bulky would in itself be a security breach by the fact that it would attract attention to you.

  117. Before we close you say if do you not get a firearms certificate you cannot learn about paragraph 12 of schedule 1 which says, "A person may without holding a firearm certificate have in his possession a firearm and ammunition while undergoing instruction in the use of firearms..."
  (Mr Robinson) That on private land, sir.

  118. It does not say that. You may well be right I am just looking—
  (Mr Robinson) It does make a lot of exceptions.

  119. It does not say anything about private land.
  (Mr Robinson) It mentions if you were out for a day's grouse shooting I can carry your shotgun for you.