| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Lady Olga Maitland: Does the hon. Gentleman agree that there has been increase in the number of knifepoint robberies? Knives are being used to intimidate and to terrorise ordinary, law-abiding citizens. That is a new turn of events and it is another reason why we must tackle the legislation energetically.
Mr. Michael: The hon. Lady is correct: we must highlight not only violence but the fear of violence and the use of threats.
I turn now to the issue of mail-order advertisements--I am pleased that the hon. Lady recognised their importance. It is most disturbing that knives called "Rambo Sidearm" and "Rambo Shortsword" are readily available to people of any age by mail order. During the passage of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Bill two years ago, the Opposition suggested that those sorts of advertisements should be regulated properly by the House of Commons. The Government responded that the Advertising Standards Authority has sufficient powers to ensure that the advertisements neither condone nor incite violent behaviour.
When we raised those important issues, I must admit that I was not entirely convinced by Ministers' responses on the subject. However, at least our debating point was recognised. The then Minister of State, Home Office commented:
I have referred to one or two knives. The "SAS shoulder holster knife"--which was among the sample advertisements that my hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn sent to the Advertising Standards Authority--was depicted alongside Nazi memorabilia and a replica assault rifle called "Arnie's Uzi". My hon. Friend provided those items to the Advertising Standards Authority, and the hon. Lady referred to examples of the same sorts of advertisements.
In view of the debates about advertising which took place two years ago, it is somewhat worrying that the response to my hon. Friend's approach to the Advertising Standards Authority is less than inspiring. The council of the ASA debated the issues earlier this month and it appears to have taken no action since the debates in this place. Those debates do not appear to have stimulated the concern and activity that one might have expected. In his reply to my hon. Friend, the chairman of the Advertising Standards Authority says:
Therefore, the authority does not have the power to implement the sort of ban that the hon. Lady and I would like to see. The chairman continues:
Descriptions such as those to which the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam and I have referred, and the juxtaposition of items in the advertisements, suggest that precisely such action should be taken. It is clear from that letter that the Advertising Standards Authority does not possess the power and freedom to act that were implied in the Minister's reply two years ago.
Mr. Fabricant:
I share the hon. Gentleman's views about the Advertising Standards Authority. Will he, however, pay tribute to the Independent Television Commission and the Radio Authority, which rigorously uphold the ban?
Mr. Michael:
I am happy to do that. When authorities are using the powers available to them, that is welcome. My point about the Advertising Standards Authority is that if, on investigation, we find that it has not exactly been proactive on the issue, and has not the powers to act even if it wished to, that is--as the chairman of the authority suggested--a matter for Parliament. If we can proceed in the spirit of today's debate, it may be possible--as the hon. Lady suggested--to agree amendments to the Bill.
The Advertising Standards Authority points out that millions of advertisements are published each year in a huge range of publications. That is true, but the authority implies that complaints from the general public are the grounds on which it should take action. Clearly, the general public do not look for advertisements for knives and other weapons; every member of the public to whom I have spoken is horrified that such advertisements are allowed. Those who will see them are people who are fascinated by violence or weapons.
The question raised by the authority is whether the very act of advertising might be seen as condoning or inciting violent behaviour. If so, it says, that will be a matter for Parliament. It seems that the ball is in our court, and I hope that we as Members of Parliament, and the Minister as a representative of the Government, will accept the responsibility.
When we debated the matter two years ago, the Minister said:
That is true, but temptation can encourage undesirable behaviour. Let me give an example. When I took a group of youngsters to Germany on an exchange visit, I was horrified to find when we returned to our minibus that one of them was showing his friends a knife with an
extremely long blade. I said, "Where on earth did that come from?" He had walked straight into a shop and bought it, because it was advertised. No questions had been asked, but there is no doubt that that young lad had no legitimate reason for having the knife.
We went back to the shop, and after some discussion the knife was taken back and the youngster's money refunded. I suspect, however, that at home he would not have gone into a shop of that kind, because he would have known that someone would ask questions. I am worried about places that people can enter anonymously--certainly in a large city--without the fear that others will ask questions. It is even more horrifying to think that young people could reply to advertisements and be able, impersonally and without scrutiny, to obtain such weapons.
As the Minister said, we should be worried about those who seek such weapons, but it behoves us to try to prevent their being available. We should end the encouragement, or tolerance, of availability of weapons that appear to incite violence. We have suggested four possible measures. The first is a ban on the sale of knives to people under a specified age. Perhaps 16 is a safe age but there could be a feeling that the age should be rather higher than that, possibly 18. However, there are complications with such definitions. We need to explore those issues to reach an effective conclusion, simply because that would close some doors.
As the hon. and learned Member for Burton(Sir I. Lawrence), who is not in his place, rightly suggested, one can do a great deal of violence with a bread knife. However, I do not think that an advertisement for a knife that is to be used for cutting bread encourages a macho image. It does not give rise to the same intolerance, the feeling that such weapons are around in society, that is engendered by advertisements for weapons that are clearly intended for violent purposes. That is an important matter.
The second element is the advertisement of knives, and the third is the proscription of military style knives and swords, martial arts weapons and deactivated and replica guns under section 141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. The other item was a warning label on all knives that are covered by section 139 of that Act. Should we not give an explicit warning that society does not expect such items to be carried and used?
In the context of the intervention by the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam, other measures need to be taken to help to break the knife culture which has affected parts of our society and which puts the police and public at risk. I agree that young people will use bread knives or screwdrivers, but so will adults who are inclined to violence. Some people will always be violent in any society, however perfect and stringent its laws. We must have the legislation and the action that are needed to tackle such people, and we must reduce the temptation or encouragement to others to be drawn into violent behaviour of any sort. We are obliged to do that, and we shall certainly seek to assist in the endeavour upon which the hon. Lady has launched us with her Bill.
We hope that good will on both sides will lead to some of those measures being included in the Bill. However,I make it absolutely clear that we do not wish to place
obstacles in the way of the Bill or to push amendments, however desirable, if they would delay or endanger the legislation. If the Bill has to have additional elements, they must be introduced by agreement and consensus throughout the House, which will allow us to move more quickly than appeared possible a short time ago. If there are difficulties, they must not be allowed to delay the Bill in any way.
If some elements need further time the Home Secretary will have our assistance and encouragement in presenting measures at another time. The Bill provides a clear opportunity, and if it is possible to take it by agreement we should not allow the chance to pass. We must go as far as is possible. As I have said, we need to reduce the environment of violence in which the carrying of knives and their use can be tolerated.
I worked with young people for many years before entering the House. We neglect the positive side of young people and their potential for good at our peril. Just two years ago, the Prince's Trust published a report prepared by the accountancy firm of Coopers and Lybrand Deloitte. That report demonstrated that positive work with young people is cost-effective in preventing crime.It looked at crime in terms of its cost to society, but,of course, the wider cost to society cannot be measured so easily and it is an even greater threat to people's security and ability to enjoy their lives in the peace that they have a right to expect.
"The British code of advertising practice includes special provisions on the advertising of weapons so that advertisements for weapons, such as knives, neither condone nor incite violent behaviour. Where advertisements are found to contravene the codes, the Advertising Standards Authority can take steps to rectify the situation as appropriate".
"There are two principal questions for the Advertising Standards Authority; first, can we ban such advertisements altogether; and, second, is there any provision in our Codes which enable us to regulate what they contain? As I explained in my previous letters, the answer to the first of these is 'No'."
"Any ban must be a question for Parliament. The answer to the second question is 'Yes' but it is important to bear in mind that the very act of advertising such weapons, their appearance and any minimum description, might be seen by some people 'to condone or incite violent behaviour'. If, however, the ASA were to make that assumption, any ruling would be the equivalent to a ban."
"The advertisement of weapons by post is not the problem. The mischief lies with those who seek to obtain unauthorised weapons by whatever means."--[Official Report, Standing Committee B,15 March 1994; c. 1356.]
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |