| Anti-social Behaviour Bill
|
|
Mr. Paice: I am grateful to the Minister and I will come back to him on that point, but will he address the other issue that I raised about young persons, perhaps those who compete in target shooting, being able to transport their weapons? I know that that issue has been raised with the Minister in a number of quarters. Mr. Ainsworth: I will deal with that. The amendment to which the hon. Gentleman referred was not selected, but it deals with an important issue Column Number: 359 that we need to consider. I am not so sympathetic to the arguments being advanced, but I will listen. I fully acknowledge that there is an issue of private land; we must deal with that and we will, as I have said. I am more than happy to continue to listen to arguments about the carriage of weapons, but we are talking about 14, 15 or 16-year-olds who are involved in gun sports carrying weapons in public places without any parental or other adult supervision. I am not certain that the clause would create the problem that others envisage, but I would like to hear from people who think that there will be a problem.Many responsible parents and young people who are involved in gun sports keep their rifles in gun clubs. Parents certainly ferry around young people who are involved in various activities. I am not convinced that we need to have very young people carrying weapons around the streets, even if those weapons are wrapped and buckled in cases. I am not opposed to people being able to go about their activities, but I do not wish to create a big loophole in the powers that we wish to give to the police to prevent misuse. I am not as convinced on that issue as I am on the private land issue. Shona McIsaac (Cleethorpes): Does my hon. Friend acknowledge that one of the concerns is that those young people could become victims of crime and the weapons could be stolen? Surely supervision is preferable to offer protection to those young people from the loutish elements in our community. Mr. Ainsworth: I am not sure how significant that is as a contributory issue, but I certainly take on board my hon. Friend's comments. I do not wish to close the door entirely, and if people wish to convince me that there is a problem, I am prepared to continue to give it consideration. The private land issue certainly needs to be dealt with. I am trying to deal with the other issue clearly and honestly. I am not certain that there is a need for 14-year-olds to be carrying guns around the streets without any supervision, even if those weapons are covered and buckled. I hope that the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire will withdraw his amendment, but I thank the Opposition and the organisations that have been following our procedures for their constructive input. We must find a way forward that maximises the effectiveness of the tools that we wish to give to the police to deal with misuse while minimising the impact on people who are taking part in sports or other legitimate activities. We do not wish to inconvenience them to any degree greater than is necessary. Mr. Paice: It is a great shame that you were not with us this morning, Mr. Cran. You would have been very interested in what I believe was one of the best debates that we have had in this Committee. We were able to address a serious issue with a considerable amount of unanimity on the desire to resolve it, even if hon. Members did not entirely agree on all of the issues. On the issue of carriage, I heard what the Minister said. I will draw it to the attention of the various shooting organisations that he still remains to be Column Number: 360 persuaded on that matter, and no doubt they will produce the evidence that they believe is appropriate. On the point raised by the hon. Member for Cleethorpes, I hope it has become obvious during this morning's proceedings that I have a little more knowledge of this issue than many, having studied a lot of work on it over the years. I am not aware of any evidence to the effect that young people carrying airguns are more likely to have them stolen. I am not saying that it could not happen, but bearing in mind that the law has stood for 30 years, I am not aware of any evidence that that has been a regular feature. We must be careful to have a sense of proportion about what may or may not happen.I am grateful to the Minister for his comments about private land. He will not be surprised to hear me say that I do not think that changing the age limit is either necessary or right. That is the view of the Firearms Consultative Committee that he quoted earlier, and I have seen its representations to him. I recognise that the Government take a different view. Although the discussion has inevitably centred on the countryside and farmland, I do not consider this a purely rural issue. For many people who live in urban areas, the nuisance use of air weapons is a significant urban issue that needs to be addressed. As the Minister has said, I have tried to come forward with proposals that will help to address it. It is perfectly reasonable for an adult take responsibility. I take as an example my own situation. When I was in my early teens-a long time ago-my father gave me an air rifle. It would have been perfectly reasonable to hold him responsible if I had misused it-I do not suggest that I did misuse it. If someone makes an air weapon available to a young person, it is reasonable that they should then be responsible for ensuring that it is used safely and properly. I do not know why the amendment I tabled was not selected-no doubt you know why that is so, Mr. Cran, but I do not. It is an important part of the mix that the Minister is seeking to address what we all agree is a problem. The hon. Member for Stockton, South, who is not here this afternoon, has a tragic constituency record and I recognise and understand the sincerity of her views. An objective person would agree that the idea of licensing all these weapons is a perfectly intellectual argument, but I share the Minister's view-as does the Association of Chief Police Officers-that it is wholly impractical and out of proportion. I recognise her strength of feeling on that matter, and I hope that she does not misunderstand my reasons for taking a different view. There are those in the sporting world who take the view that we should fight to the last ditch on the issue of the age limit and to keep it where it is. My hon. Friends and I want to find a way forward that will allow young people to continue to use air weapons on private property in the way that they traditionally have done. As long as they do not use them unlawfully, that is the way forward that we should try to find. I am grateful to the Minister for his kind words. He questioned my use of the word ''lawfully''. That is the only section of the amendment on which I took advice. Column Number: 361 Someone asked me earlier where the wording of the amendments came from, which I took as a mortal insult as I had drafted them all myself. Someone suggested that I should use ''with the consent of the occupier'', but I was advised that ''lawful authority'' is a traditional legal phrase that covers not only the occupier but the person who holds the shooting rights, who may be a different person. It also ensures that the weapon is being used lawfully on the land and not for shooting something should not be shot at. The Minister will look at that.Mr. Ainsworth: If I table an amendment that includes the term ''lawful authority'', the hon. Gentleman will be nothing other than pleased. I am not saying that he is wrong-we just need to look at it and understand it. Mr. Paice: I appreciate that point. If the Minister comes forward with such an amendment I will not say, ''I told you so''. The issue is serious. I think that the Minister understands that the activities of tens of thousands of young people stand to be seriously affected by the clause. I understand why he thought he should start with a ban and rein back with amendments rather than proposed something about private land that he then must change. I am simply concerned that we get the provision right before the Bill receives Royal Assent. I accept that the Minister will genuinely seek a way forward. If my amendments help him in that, I am content. I do not know when the Report stage will be, but it would be helpful if the measure could be put right before we send the Bill to the other place. In the light of this debate, which I thoroughly appreciate, and the Minister's sincere response, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The Chairman, being of the opinion that the principle of the clause and any matters arising thereon had been adequately discussed in the course of debate on the amendment proposed thereto, forthwith put the Question, pursuant to Standing Orders Nos. 68 and 89, That the clause stand part of the Bill. Question agreed to. Clause 43 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
|
| |
| ©Parliamentary copyright 2003 | Prepared 20 May 2003 |
