| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Lang: If these proposals had been in place at that time, my guess is that that strike would not have taken place.
Points of Order
4.38 pm
Mr. Roy Beggs (East Antrim): On a point of order, Madam Speaker. With reference to the Prime Minister's challenge to the comments made by the hon. Member for Foyle (Mr. Hume), I ask whether such a challenge was justified, bearing it in mind that early-day motion 93 tabled on 29 October was on record in the House, showing that every elected representative in Northern Ireland opposed the proposals to reduce the number of education and library boards from five to three.
Madam Speaker: I noticed that the hon. Gentleman got excited when the Prime Minister gave his answer during Question Time. However, the matter he raises with me now is not a point of order but a point of argument, and I may accept only points of order.
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow): On a point of order, Madam Speaker. On the significant point of principle as to whether hon. Members should be allowed to have their say before British troops are irrevocably committed to a dangerous situation, has the Secretary of State for Defence disclosed to you when he wishes to report to the House on the factual findings of Brigadier Jonathan Thompson and his reconnaissance team? He should report to the House so that he may hear hon. Members' comments on the subject before the Cabinet decides irrevocably to commit British forces to Zaire.
Madam Speaker: I have not been informed that the Secretary of State for Defence, or any other Secretary of State, is seeking to make a statement about Zaire today. I refer the hon. Gentleman to my comments yesterday, which I still have very much in mind.
Mr. George Foulkes (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley): On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I shall not point out that the Tories ran out of questioners halfway through the statement of the President of the Board of Trade. Did you notice that the Labour spokesman was joined by the spokesmen from the Scottish National party, the Welsh National party, the Ulster Unionists and the Liberal Democrats in opposing the statement? Is there any way of putting that fact on record?
Madam Speaker: The hon. Gentleman is trying to continue questions on the statement. He should have caught my eye at the appropriate time rather than seeking to use points of order in that way.
19 Nov 1996 : Column 859
Orders of the Day
Firearms (Amendment) Bill
(Clauses Nos. 1 to 5 and any new Clauses and Schedules appearing on the Order Paper not later than Friday 15th November which relate to the prohibition of small firearms or to further special exemptions from the general prohibition of small firearms.)
Considered in Committee. [Progress, 18 November].
Motion made, and Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
The Minister of State, Home Office (Miss Ann Widdecombe):
Clause 2 provides that a person does not need the Secretary of State's authority, under section 5(1)(aba) of the Firearms Act 1968 as inserted by clause 1 of the Bill, to possess, purchase, acquire, sell, or transfer a slaughtering instrument if he is duly authorised by a firearms certificate. The Secretary of State's authority will not be required for a person to have a slaughtering instrument in his possession if he is already entitled, under section 10 of the 1968 Act, to possess it without a firearms certificate. That will allow a slaughterman licensed under the Slaughterhouses Act 1974 or the proprietor of an abattoir to continue using a slaughtering instrument as part of his normal duties.
For many years, the firearms Acts have exempted licensed professional slaughterers from the need to hold certificates and we propose that that should be allowed to continue. The instruments that they use--many of which have a captive bolt--pose no threat to the protection of the public. We believe that in those cases it is right to allow the chief officer of police the discretion to grant section 1 certificates to such people. He will be able to assess each case on its merits.
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow):
As the hon. Member for Falmouth and Camborne (Mr. Coe) is the Government Whip on duty, it seems appropriate to ask about starting pistols used at athletics meetings. There are all sorts of anomalies; will that one be covered?
Miss Widdecombe:
The hon. Gentleman is ahead of the Committee's discussions. The issue of starting pistols will be debated under one of the clauses--I think it is clause 4--that we shall discuss this afternoon.
We believe that it is right that the chief officer should be able to assess each case on its merits and that it would be unnecessarily bureaucratic to require people in this category to obtain the Secretary of State's separate authority.
Sir Jerry Wiggin (Weston-super-Mare):
It is essential that such people are able to possess and use the appropriate instruments, and we support the special
19 Nov 1996 : Column 860
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Motion made, and Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
Miss Widdecombe:
Clause 3 provides that a person does not need the Secretary of State's authority, under section 5(1)(aba) of the Firearms Act 1968 as inserted by clause 1 of the Bill, to possess, purchase, acquire, sell or transfer a firearm held on a firearms certificate that is subject to a condition that it is to be used only for the humane killing of animals. That would cover not only vets and Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals officials but others, including hunt servants, whom the chief constable is satisfied have a genuine need for a handgun for that purpose. That may involve producing evidence to prove that need.
Vets and others have long used handguns for the humane killing of animals, and it would be wrong to expect or require them to change their practices. We accepted the argument that the alternatives available, such as rifles, shotguns and tranquilliser darts, would not be as effective. The advantages of using pistols to put animals out of their misery are obvious. The circumstances of the exemption are clear and only professionals or other experienced persons will be able to prove their need to the chief officer.
We believe that in those cases it is right that the chief officer of police should have the discretion to grant section 1 certificates and that each case should be assessed on its merits. We believe that it would be unnecessarily bureaucratic to require such people to obtain the Secretary of State's separate authority.
Mr. Dalyell:
Does the exemption have the agreement--which seems to be implied--of the British Veterinary Association? Has that group been consulted and has it agreed to the exemption?
Miss Widdecombe:
The organisation has made its views known and it is beyond me why it would not agree to our proposal, given that vets clearly must be exempt.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 3 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Motion made, and Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
Miss Widdecombe:
Clause 4 provides that a person does not need the Secretary of State's authority, under section 5(1)(aba) of the Firearms Act 1968, to possess, purchase, acquire, sell or transfer a firearm that is held on a firearms certificate with the condition that it is to be
19 Nov 1996 : Column 861
Most starting pistols--for example, those commonly used at school sports days--do not have an open barrel and are simply designed to make a bang. They are not classed as firearms and the legislation would not affect them. According to the British Athletics Federation, major athletics events require starting guns that are classed as firearms. For technical reasons, starters require a gun that can produce a very loud bang and a highly visible flash from the muzzle. Special blank ammunition is used for that purpose. The visible flash is required to notify the manual timekeepers who are required to act as a back-up in case the electronic systems fail.
Such accurate timekeeping is essential only for races where international, national or regional records will be set and such records are recognised only when a BAF starter is present. We understand that a .22 pistol would not be suitable for that task as it would not produce either a bright enough flash or a loud enough bang. A firearms certificate for a starting gun will not allow the possession of live ammunition as race starters require only blank rounds.
We believe that it is right that the chief officer of police should have the discretion to assess each case on its merits and that it would be unnecessarily bureaucratic to do it any other way.
4.41 pm
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |