| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
11.30 am
The Minister of State continued:
"Where advertisements are found to contravene the codes, the Advertising Standards Authority can take steps to rectify the situation as appropriate."--[Official Report, Standing Committee B, 15 March 1994; c. 1357.]
26 Apr 1996 : Column 696
We now know that the powers of the ASA are not appropriate, but clearly at that time the Minister thought that something should be done about the matter, and erroneously believed that the ASA had the power to intervene. As I said, the ASA has made it clear that it does not have that capacity.
In March, I asked the authority what action it had taken on various advertisements referred to it by my hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn. The answer was simply that the matter had been referred to a working party. I do not see the point of referring a matter to a working party if the authority does not have the power to deal with those specific issues and the periodicals that advertise such items.
We would end up with a tougher code enjoining The Guardian and The Times in even stricter terms to observe the standards that they observe already. That is patently useless in tackling the development of the knife culture.
There are advertisements generally available in this country that find their way all too easily to impressionable young people, displaying illustrations of weapons that no one could reasonably want for legitimate purposes. They incite people to purchase such weapons for all the wrong reasons. Such advertising should be brought under control, and my amendment at least addresses that specific problem.
Mr. Nicholas Baker:
I understand what the hon. Gentleman is after, but how can he establish whether a generally available advertisement is directed at people under 16? Would it not be more straightforward to say that he really wants to ban advertisements of all kinds?
Mr. Michael:
No, but I do want to ban advertisements that encourage the carrying of articles for an offensive or violent purpose, and that is what the amendment would do. The point is that those who use such advertising are seeking impressionable people, especially impressionable young people. That is where the tap ought to be turned off, and that is what my amendment would do.
The clause as it stands puts the onus on those in the retail trade, especially people who specialise in country sports, to ensure that they do not sell weapons to young people under 16. It is right that they should have that responsibility, but the stable door is still left wide open on mail order. There is no control over the type of articles advertised that can be purchased by youngsters through mail order. That is why the amendment is needed.
That may be irresponsible advertising, and it is not controlled. The mail order advertisers are not controlled as the Bill will control the retail trade in general, so there is a wide gap in the provisions that we are passing. We have put the onus on the retail trade, which will put an additional pressure on many responsible shops, and we think it right to do so, but it is surely also right to put the onus on advertisers not to advertise weapons of the type that I have described.
The clause as it stands says:
that would now be an article or a weapon--
The amendment seeks three things. First, it would place a similar penalty on a person who encouraged or incited the purchase of such a weapon. That is straightforward. People should not incite youngsters to obtain and carry weapons.
Secondly, the amendment would make it a punishable offence to buy a weapon on behalf of a youngster under 16. Surely that is a sensible extension of the requirement. Thirdly, it would make it a punishable offence to advertise
That would not stop the advertising or sale to adults of items needed for legitimate activities such as work or fishing or whatever; it would concentrate the weight of the legislation on the nature of advertisements that include words that appear to make violence attractive or to incite those who are interested in violence.
I congratulate the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam on bringing the Bill before the House, and hon. Members on both sides of the House who have supported it. We are tackling a serious problem, and we need to go behind that problem to the culture that appears to encourage people, especially young people, to become involved in carrying weapons, and potentially in actual violence. I hope that my amendment will attract support throughout the House and that the Minister will accept it.
Sir Michael Shersby:
I am pleased to follow the hon. Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth (Mr. Michael), and I have considerable sympathy for what he said. He touched on an important subject, of which many hon. Members will have had no experience, because they do not come into contact with the type of publication that he was talking about.
Mr. Michael:
May I make it clear that I--and, I am sure, the hon. Gentleman himself and my hon. Friends--have come across such periodicals only in the course of research?
Sir Michael Shersby:
I am sure that that is the case.
I shall tell the House about an experience that I had two or three years ago, when the chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation drew my attention to an advertisement that, if I remember rightly, appeared in one or two of the east London local papers. It was for a commando knife made of carbon fibre, complete with blood channels, which was described as an ideal Christmas present. It was said that it could be used as a letter opener.
The advertiser did not give his address, simply a telephone number, but it was made clear that one could purchase the knife by using a Visa card. The chairman of the federation and I set out to track down the address of the advertiser, and used all the legitimate channels open to us, but we could not find it. The telephone number was ex-directory.
We therefore decided to purchase the article to see what was being offered. I still have mine locked up in a safe as an example of such terrible weapons. We referred the matter to the Home Secretary, who was extremely concerned about it. An individual was clearly advertising a weapon that had only one purpose--to kill. It could certainly not by any stretch of the imagination be described as a letter opener. If I tried to bring mine into the House today, I think that you would instantly have me incarcerated in the Clock Tower, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It is a serious and dangerous weapon.
Since then, I have seen a number of other examples of such items, often advertised in the fliers that are inserted in local newspapers. Newspaper proprietors may not be
aware of the detailed contents of the fliers; they are interested only in the business of circulating them in the newspaper. Therefore, they can reach a wide variety of people, many of whom will be young. Other advertisements appear in what I would describe as fringe periodicals of one kind or another, which are sometimes issued free with newspapers. They advertise a horrifying variety of articles that no law-abiding citizen would want to possess. As has been pointed out, such articles are particularly attractive to young people--particularly men between the ages of 16 and 18 who are becoming interested in knives, guns and things of that nature.
We must address that problem. It is very difficult to deal with because, as I said by way of intervention earlier, the advertisements and fliers do not always come to the attention of respectable and distinguished bodies such as the Advertising Standards Authority or the Committee of Advertising Practice, which deal with such matters in a practical and a sensible manner. The advertisements and fliers in question often appear on the fringes of society. But they advertise equipment--certainly knives and other dangerous articles--that has only one purpose: to kill human beings.
I realise that it is a difficult problem to resolve. However, I express my strong support for the arguments advanced by the hon. Gentleman. He makes a good point, which needs to be addressed--although I do not underestimate the difficulties of doing so.
Mr. Peter Atkinson:
I urge my hon. Friend the Minister not to accept amendment No. 22. I understand exactly what its supporters seek to do. However, I fear that if we accepted the amendment, we would not achieve the results that my hon. Friend the Member for Uxbridge (Sir M. Shersby) and the hon. Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth (Mr. Michael) seek. In accepting the amendment, we would be going down the slippery slope of restricting freedom of expression.
"Any person who sells to a person under the age of sixteen years an article to which this section applies"--
"shall be guilty of an offence liable . . . to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or a fine not exceeding level 5".
"such an article for sale in a way which appears to incite or condone the possession of such an article for violent purposes".
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |