---

Mr. Howard: Yes. I am not surprised that the Opposition do not like to be reminded of the effect of their policies.

Mr. Foulkes: Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that there is great disappointment throughout the

28 Oct 1996 : Column 340

country that he has not seen fit to introduce a measure to ban combat knives, on the spurious excuse that he cannot tell combat knives from household knives? Has he ever seen a combat knife? It is one of the most horrific and easily identifiable knives that he will ever see.

Mr. Howard: However much the hon. Gentleman and his party may pretend otherwise, the truth is that we have not been able to come up with a satisfactory definition of a combat knife.

Mr. Foulkes: Rubbish.

Mr. Howard: It is not. The Association of Chief Police Officers agrees with us, as do the Scottish Police Federation and the Police Superintendents Association of England and Wales. We have been working with the police for some time to try to come up with a satisfactory definition. ACPO has said, and the other associations agree, that it is not possible to do so without at the same time banning lawful knives.

Mr. Jack Straw (Blackburn): On Independent Television News at lunchtime, a representative of the Police Superintendents Association said:

"If they can get a man on the moon, I am sure they can come to a definition of a combat knife."

Does not the Secretary of State think that there is a palpable difference, which can be defined in law, between a kitchen knife and the sort of knife advertised in the magazine Gun and Accessories Mart as:

"Special operation knife, ¼" stock, 12" overall, 145 lbs",

which has no purpose whatever other than killing or maiming people? It should be banned.

Mr. Howard: ACPO, in a letter dated 9 May--[Interruption.] We have been looking at the issue, together with ACPO, for some time. The letter said:

"I should first say that we agree with you on the impossibility of defining an undesirable dangerous knife without also catching other knives which should not be banned. We can all sympathise with the public view that certain types of hunting knives should not be on sale, but their definition would be difficult and the benefit dubious if carving and other catering knives are to remain available."

The Police Superintendents Association, to which the hon. Member for Blackburn referred, issued a press release this afternoon saying:

"The Association's views do not differ from our colleagues in the Police Service and mirror those of the Home Secretary."

The truth is that the Opposition were invited last week by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to put forward any suggestions that they might have, but what was their response? They came forward not with a suggested definition, but with a petition. What we need are definitions, not petitions, and rather less of the trivialising gesture politics in which the hon. Member for Blackburn and his party indulge.

Mr. Straw: Would the Home Secretary like to read on? The national secretary of the Police Superintendents Association says in today's statement:

"We believe that both the Home Secretary, Michael Howard, and the Shadow Home Secretary, Jack Straw, have the same ambition to deal with so-called 'combat knives'."

28 Oct 1996 : Column 341

I hope that that is true. The statement goes on:

"It is up to those concerned now to see if such a definition can be agreed and to support any measures proposed by the Government as a result."

It was the same representative of the association who, at lunch time, asserted on ITN that it was possible to distinguish between a kitchen knife and a combat knife--and it is.

Mr. Howard: I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman is casting any aspersions on the credibility or veracity of the secretary of the Police Superintendents Association. I read what the association's press release said--that its views mirror my own. Of course I would like to ban combat knives if we could come up with a satisfactory definition--we have been trying to come up with one for a considerable period of time. If the hon. Gentleman has any suggestions, I will consider them carefully--but we need specific suggestions for a definition, not party politics built on petitions.

Dame Elaine Kellett-Bowman (Lancaster): I agree very much with my right hon. and learned Friend about kitchen knives and so forth. I am a keen cook--[Interruption.] The hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw) appears to be amused; I remind him that I was the country's No. 1 housewife in 1960. It would be difficult to define the knives in my kitchen. I do not believe that my right hon. and learned Friend saw the kitchen knife displayed by the right hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott), but the only thing that that proved is that his wife has never let him into the kitchen--no one would regard that as an eligible kitchen knife.

Mr. Howard: I have never had the privilege of being invited into my hon. Friend's kitchen, but I am certain that she would not give kitchen room to the knife that the right hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott) played with during his absurd shenanigans in front of the television cameras on Friday.

I want to draw attention to the real reason why the Labour party has engaged in this entirely synthetic fuss about knives. Three Labour Members rose to intervene during the part of my speech in which I pointed out the fact that Labour has no proposals to deal with second serious violent offenders. That is a diversionary tactic designed to divert attention from the extremely important proposals that I shall explain to the House.

Mr. Alan Howarth (Stratford-on-Avon) rose--

Mr. Howard: It always gives me great pleasure to give way to and deal with the interventions of the hon. Member for Stratford-on-Avon (Mr. Howarth), so I am delighted to give way to him now.

Mr. Howarth: There is a pressing and urgent problem in respect of knives, and it is fatuous of the Home Secretary to contemplate some kind of endless Socratic dialogue in which we attempt to define a knife--that is, of course, impossible. He must accept, however, that any police officer, magistrate or judge can recognise the sort

28 Oct 1996 : Column 342

of knife that is designed for violence. Is not the right hon. and learned Gentleman's difficulty--which I can well understand in view of his uncomfortable experiences at their hands--that he is prejudiced against allowing the judges any more discretion? Because of that prejudice, he is prepared to allow the knife culture to fester and citizens to remain at risk of being injured or killed.

Mr. Howard: The hon. Gentleman's suggestion is absurd. Everybody, including the police, agrees that a definition is needed before those knives can be banned. I understand that even the hon. Member for Blackburn agrees with that. We have welcomed co-operation in trying to find a definition, but it is not an easy task.

Mr. Alun Michael (Cardiff, South and Penarth): You have not.

Mr. Howard: The hon. Gentleman says from a sedentary position that we have not invited co-operation. Last week, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister wrote a letter in which he specifically invited co-operation. He said that, if Labour Members were able to suggest a definition, we would be happy to sit down with them and discuss it. That remains our position.

Mr. Clive Soley (Hammersmith) rose--

Mr. Michael: I shall give way to the hon. Member for Hammersmith (Mr. Soley), but I shall not allow Labour Members to continue to divert attention from the serious matters that I was addressing in my speech.

Mr. Soley: I am grateful to the Home Secretary for giving way at last. There are several proposals, some of which have been around since at least 1985, when I put one to one of his predecessors. It was seriously considered then and should be considered again now. A sub-committee should be set up in the Home Office to consider imitation guns and knives, and to make recommendations on them. Using the statutory instrument procedure, certain types of knives should be designated unacceptable for sale or production. If we can ensure that it is impossible even to look through the window of bookmakers' shops, the Home Secretary can ensure that knives are not displayed so that some young lad with a fantasy of violence can look in a window and see how much it would cost to turn his fantasy into horrific reality

Mr. Howard: There is no difficulty about the procedure. The hon. Gentleman is right to identify the statutory instrument procedure. We have used it in order to ban 14 knives and sharp instruments. We are not reluctant to use it. That is why I have said repeatedly that as soon as we have a definition--if such can be produced--of a combat knife, we shall not hesitate to use the procedure that we have used in the past. I have no hang-up about using it; I would be delighted to do so. The only difficulty is the purely practical one of finding a workable definition.

---