Examination of witnesses (Questions 400
- 419)
TUESDAY 11 JANUARY 2000
MR CHARLES
CLARKE and MR
GRAHAM WIDDECOMBE
400. From 1,940 such crimes in 1989 to 1500-odd
nearly ten years later.
(Mr Clarke) I have not got the statistics you are
referring to in front of me, but with that qualification I believe
you are accurately describing the statistics.
401. There have been big changes in the system
for counting the statistics for criminal offences in 1998, have
there not? Can you tell us why they have been made and what effect
they are going to have on our ability to spot continuity?
(Mr Clarke) There has been a real difficulty about
the whole basis of police statistics for a long period of time.
The first difficulty has been comparative bases of statistics
across different forces throughout the country, where different
forces have used different bases for counting statistics. The
second difficulty has been the definitions of what is recorded
crime and in what circumstances does a crime count as a recorded
crime or not, where quite different practices have been operating
in different parts of the country. That is why the Home Secretary
decided, with the support of ACPO and the Association of Police
Authorities, to move on to a basis which was comparable across
the country and where people knew where they were. That is running
through every category of crime, and that is why we have made
the changes which you are referring to and which we are developing
over a period of time. It is difficulty, as any researcher in
criminology will confirm, I think, to be clear on what is the
best basis for statistical assessmentwhat is the ground
line in the case of crimes, since there are so many subjective
judgments involved in what is a crime and what is not a crime.
We are trying to get a comparative basis so that we can discuss
it in a more intelligent way. Incidentally, I believe that is
something the Select Committee has been pressing for for some
time, and rightly so.
402. It is going to make it jolly hard, is it
not, to identify trends over time and might make it impossible
to evaluate the effects of the pistol ban?
(Mr Clarke) Obviously, with any change of statistics
there is a discontinuity at the point of the change which makes
comparisons more difficult. However, as you know, there are statistical
techniques for addressing it, by looking at the comparisons between
the streams up to the point of change and the streams after the
point of change. We certainly want to make that happen. For example,
the statistics that were published before Christmas in these areas
were published side-by-sidethe old basis with the statistics
on the new basisin order that there could be some form
of comparison. I cannot dispute your central point, however, that
any change in the basis leads to more difficulties in doing comparisons
over time than would otherwise have been the case. We think it
is more important to establish a consistent and coherent basis
to the system, and we thought that was necessary.
403. On this point of crime committed with air
rifles increasing, do you not agree with me that this may or may
not be the case given that we have had a change in statistical
methods, which now includes all cases of criminal damage and not
just those of over £20, as used to be the case, which can
make comparisons unreal?
(Mr Clarke) I agree with you that the qualification
that you have expressed in the statistics is important to take
into account when looking at the way figures have moved, but I
do not believe it is true to say there is no meaningful information
we can get out of this situation.
404. Fair enough. A couple of last questions.
The use of shotguns in crime is falling, is it not?
(Mr Clarke) That is what the evidence shows at the
moment, yes.
405. Finally, I know you accept the importance
of education so far as young people are concerned, but would you
accept my general principle that the real problem is not the lawful
shooters, of whom there are many thousands in this country, but
the criminals and the illegal guns? That is our real problem,
and it is a mistake to hammer the former when we should be hammering
the latter.
(Mr Clarke) As I said, fundamentally I do think that
is right, and it is right to look at the illegal use of weapons
in terms of crime. However, I also think it is important to have
a proper regulated system for the legal use of guns. Obviously,
the better regulated the system for the legal use of guns then
the more difficult it is for guns to slip over that line between
legal and illegal, which is why the statein my view rightlytakes
upon itself the job of regulating that properly. I think it is
important and, in many ways, the more it is strengthened and clarified
the better.
Mr Malins: Thank you very much.
Mr Stinchcombe
406. Minister, when Mr Winnick gave you some
figures about offences with air weapons at the beginning of his
questions you said that you were not worried by them. Those figureswhich
showed an increase from 4,813 to, I think the figure given was,
7,506 in 1997were figures to do with reported crimes. Indeed,
the figures for 1998/99 show us that there were 8,665 reported
crimes. Notwithstanding the comments made by Mr Malins, which
have to be taken into account, as to the statistical basis upon
which these figures are collected, surely no Minister in the Home
Office can fail to be concerned by a virtual doubling in reported
offences with a single weapon over an eleven-year period?
(Mr Clarke) Firstly, no Home Office Minister
can be but concerned about any increase in crime with any weaponwhatever
it is. I agree with you. As I said in answer to Mr Winnick, however,
I think that the question of the extent to which legislation would
help deal with this problem is a very major question. I am looking
forward very much to the recommendations that you intend to make
about air weapons, to see how that moves forward. Yes, I do have
a general concern about any increase in crime with weapons of
any description, that is right.
407. Do you know whether the majority of these
offences caused by air weapons are caused by air weapons which
were illegally or legally held?
(Mr Clarke) I do not myself know the answer to that
question, as you speak, but I can let you have a note on any information
we have. I do not know if Mr Widdecombe has any information on
that to hand.
(Mr Widdecombe) Well, by definition they will probably
be legal insofar as they are not controlled or certificated. There
may be some which were donated wrongly to somebody under 14, but,
by and large, because they are not certificated they are legal.
408. They were legally in circulation?
(Mr Widdecombe) Yes.
Mr Stinchcombe: Thank you very much.
Mr Linton
409. Further on the same point, Minister, did
I understand you earlier to say that as far as legally held weapons
were concerned you thought they presented no significant risk
to public safety?
(Mr Clarke) I do not recall using those words, but
taking it through I do not think they do present a significant
risk to public safety, as we stand at the moment, although I believe
that we have to be continually vigilant in looking at the way
they are regulated.
410. Is that related simply to the use of weapons
in crime? If we just look at the criminal damage, there is a lot
of use of air weaponsas I understand it two-thirds of firearms
offences are caused by air weaponsand it is almost entirely
criminal damage.
(Mr Clarke) Let me put it like this, Mr Linton. I
think there is a case for bringing air weapons within the regulated
system more explicitlyI think there is a strong case for
thatand it is a matter you will be considering as to how
we should operate. That is for a variety of different reasons.
However, I think there is a case for having consistency in the
way the law operates in relation to different types of weapon.
I think one of the problems about the current legislative framework
is that it is patchy in the way it operates in different areas.
However, when you ask me the question directly "Do I believe
that actually these weapons present a substantial and significant
threat to public safety", I cannot say that I do feel that
that is a major concern. I think the far bigger concern is the
whole issue of the illegal use of weapons which we have talked
about before and where I think we need to perform better.
411. What I am inviting you to do is draw a
distinction between the use of weapons in crime, where I think
it is common ground that it is not air weapons that are mainly
used in crime, or cause the problem, and the problem in the use
of air weapons mainly by 17- and 18-year olds in the summer holidays
on many housing estates. Although it is not a problem of crime
in the sense of robbery or burglary, it is, nevertheless, a considerable
problem to people living in those areas.
(Mr Clarke) I accept the distinction you are making,
and I was talking about crime in the sense you described it in
the first part of the question. I think it would be highly desirable
to have a situation where the type of use of air weapons which
you are describing was inhibited more effectively by the law,
which is one of the reasons why my personal view is that there
is a case for having a more coherent system across the whole range.
412. You do not think it would be impractical
to have some kind of certification system?
(Mr Clarke) I think there would be very significant
practical issues, and that is one of the reasons why it has not
happened in the past. Do I think, ultimately, it would be impractical?
I think it depends upon the precise scheme that can be developed.
There are significant practical problems in doing it, which is
why it has not happened in the past, but, on the other hand, I
acknowledge, as you are implying in your line of questioning,
that there are also significant benefits in being able to put
such a system in place. It is that balance between the benefits
which you are implying and the practicalities of the system which
we have to weigh up in deciding where to go.
Mr Howarth
413. Minister, you explained to Mr Malins why
it was that you had introduced changes to the recording of crime
in order to reduce inconsistency between different police forces,
but you did not explain why you changed the calendar date for
reporting, from the calendar year to the financial year. Can you
explain that change?
(Mr Clarke) There is always an argument about years
and dates, but the central reason at the time was to ensure that
you had comparability between the various targets and approaches
that are being set for police forces, basically on the basis of
the financial year because the is the legal year that operates,
and we wanted to ensure data was collected in a way that was consistent
with that so that we could monitor more effectively the way in
which different parts of the criminal justice system were operating
in relation to that data. That is the fundamental reason.
414. It was not to tie-in with calculations
of budgets and looking at the figures to coincide with budgetary
implications?
(Mr Clarke) It is an interesting debate to go down
the whole approach of the role of targeting budgets, and so on,
in the way we are trying to develop more efficient public service,
but it certainly is the case that I think there is a strong argument
for aligning budget years, target years, performance years and
data in a way that we can measure more effectively how different
parts of the public sector are performing.
415. Minister, can I tell you that it came as
a surprise to us that the changes had been introduced. It was
only in the last few days that we have discovered, on this Committee,
that the change had been introduced. I understand there has been
no public consultation about it, particularly with those who,
in this debate on firearms, are very concerned about the accuracy
of the statistical evidence upon which we, as law makers, are
making decisions.
(Mr Clarke) I may be talking at cross purposes, and
I do not mean to be, if I am doing so, but the data that we are
publishing and on which we have moved forward was decided more
than a year agoand I am speaking from memory now.
416. Consultation took place at the time?
(Mr Clarke) It certainly did with organisations such
as ACPO and the APA, across a wide range of opinion there. I am
exercised about what you say about the information to your Committee
and I will look at the situation and establish what the time-scales
were and let you have a note on that.
417. I would be grateful, and it is not a point
of simple, academic interest, because there are those who might
well suggest that the effect of this change in the data that has
been recorded on crime is to make comparison with the conditions
that applied before the introduction of the framework legislation
introduced by this and the previous governments very difficult
to make. Those who are extremely cynical might suggest that it
has been deliberately done in order to muddy the water so that
it is not possible to see what effect the ban on handguns has
had on crime.
(Mr Clarke) I know that you, Mr Howarth, are not cynical
in your assessment and motives in any of these areas.
418. Indeed.
(Mr Clarke) However, I do think it would be extraordinarily
cynical to suggest that the Government has skewed the whole of
its data reporting on crime throughout the whole of the criminal
justice system in order to bypass some concerns that some of the
shooting lobby might have. The fact is we are trying to get to
a consistent basis across the whole of the system, for the reasons
that you implied and I accepted about the questions of performance
and targeting. The idea that it was pushed through in some kind
of surreptitious way to hoodwink the shooting lobby, or anybody
else, I really think is mistaken.
419. I am encouraged by that response and, also,
by other responses you have made, Minister, but you will be acutely
aware that this Committee in its deliberations is under strong
pressure from certain quarters to persuade you to introduce Draconian
further legislation on air weapons and shotguns, in particular,
and that it has not helped a proper and calm assessment of these
matters if people are going to bandy around hugely increased crime
figures which are not based on reality but are based on the change
in statistical arrangements.
(Mr Clarke) Two or three points, Mr Howarth. Firstly,
I think we would all oppose Draconian legislation, in whatever
form it arose. Secondly, I agree with that there is always an
issue in statistics and arguments for legislative change, and,
as I said to Mr Malins in his earlier question, I think the question
of how data sequences work is part of that debate but is changed
by the way in which we change the basis. I acknowledge that point.
However, thirdly, I think it is fair and legitimate to considerfor
the reasons identified by Mr Linton in his questionwhether
some form of tighter legal regulation of air weapons ought to
be taken into account. We have been very careful to say, as a
Government, that we are relatively open-minded on this point and
we are looking to see what the FCC has saidand they have
made their view clearand we will very much be looking to
see what the Select Committee says on this matter, and to look
at opinion right across the whole range, because there is a difficult
balance between the desire of inhibiting the use of firearms in
a way that can be dangerous and anti-social, as a minimumin
the way Mr Linton has describedand the practicality of
putting the proposition into place. That is the balance and judgment
we have to come to.
Mr Howarth: Can I thank you very much for that
comprehensive reply, Minister, because I think you are going to
need to be clear to the public about the way in which those statistics
are now being dealt with. In particular, in respect of air weapons,
I hope you will also take into account that the previous figures,
which excluded any criminal damage of less than £20, need
to be considered in two respects: not only in the removal of that
exemption now, which obviously has inflated the number of offences,
but, also, inflation over the period since 1988 itself has naturally
increased the likely number even further still. Minister, to move
one other subject which I promised the Chairman of the FCC I would
raise with you, in their report they did suggest to youagreeing
with you, as they do, that illegal weapons is a real problemthey
should undertake research into the origin
Chairman: Mr Howarth, I think you were out of
the room when we put this point to the Minister and he said they
are actively looking at it.
|