---

Mr. Mark Oaten (Winchester) (LD): The Home Secretary was unfair on the shadow Home Secretary, who presented a reasonable case on firearms. I do not always agree with the shadow Home Secretary, but I found it difficult to disagree with him this time, particularly on the six questions that he put to the Home Secretary. I disagreed with him on some issues, which I shall address later, but the Home Secretary's approach was unhelpful.

We could argue endlessly about whether crime has gone up or down in this country. I agree with the Home Secretary that an overall drop in crime has occurred, which is welcome, but none of us welcomes the 6 million crimes that take place in this country. Whether or not a slight dip has occurred in one area, far too many crimes take place, and we have seen a big increase in the most serious crimes—particularly gun crimes.

Behind those statistics, actual individuals are victims of crime, and I have talked to some of then in the past week. In Taunton, for example, I met an estate agent, Mark Jeans, who was stabbed six weeks ago. Fortunately, his life was saved because the knife went into his ribs, and the only item that was taken was a packet of cigarettes. Last week, a friend of mine was mugged in London—a brick was pushed into his face in order to take his mobile phone. In my constituency,
 
18 Oct 2004 : Column 675
 
70 people's cars were scraped and had their wing mirrors pushed in. When we discuss the figures, it is important to remember what crimes mean for individuals.

Mr. Ian Liddell-Grainger (Bridgwater) (Con): The hon. Gentleman mentioned Taunton. One reason crimes occur in Taunton is that the majority of police in Somerset must go into Bristol, because they are part of Avon and Somerset police. That reduces police numbers in Somerset, but the Home Secretary consistently refuses to address the issue.

Mr. Oaten: I agree that visible policing is one issue that concerns the public. In the area that I saw, the police station was round the corner and CCTV cameras were all around, so many of the precautions that we like to see to stop crime were in place, but I obviously take the wider and general point.

Let me say a few words about firearms, which the shadow Home Secretary mainly focused on, although his motion goes wider. The very large increase in such crimes—from just under 5,000 in 1997 to 10,000 in the last set of recorded figures—is troubling. Generally speaking, the pattern of firearm crime could be described as "bad versus bad"—organised crime carried out by individuals who are involved in the crime itself and in the associated gun traffic. The sadness, as we have heard through the examples given, is that innocent people often get involved in such crime.

Recent gun crime statistics suggest that not only those involved in drugs and organised crime perpetrate gun crimes, as petty criminals are starting to carry guns as well. That is a worrying trend, because it means that gun crime is spreading into areas beyond those that we have seen in the past.

I agree with some of the arguments advanced by the shadow Home Secretary, but I wish to raise one concern. The Government are considering the whole question of firearms legislation. Like many hon. Members, particularly those who represent rural constituencies, I have received several representations from those opposed to changing the law to cover individuals who hold guns for the purposes of sport. I am sure that the Minister for Crime Reduction, Policing and Community will be sensitive to that in carrying out the consultation. We are right to express our worries about firearms, but individuals in rural constituencies who have a legitimate reason for carrying guns do not want a further extension of legislation in that area.

Mr. Blunkett: One of the reasons I was more robust than the hon. Gentleman would have liked with the shadow Home Secretary is that it is a little aggravating to hear someone advocating policies about removing guns from people when their party voted against the legislation on handguns. The hon. Gentleman makes a perfectly reasonable point about sensitivity in considering such issues, but every time that they are raised in this House we hear contradictions from
 
18 Oct 2004 : Column 676
 
Members with a particular interest in maintaining the status quo: that is why they have been so difficult to handle.

Mr. Oaten: I entirely recognise the Home Secretary's dilemma. Without wishing to open up a set of arguments against me, there is sometimes an obvious contradiction in being a liberal in such matters, because on the one hand we ask for legislation but on the other we tend not to want the state to over-legislate. It is a balancing act.

Given that gun crimes generally happen in urban and city areas rather than rural areas, we should consider legislation for different parts of the country that reflects where the main problems lie. I hope that, when the Government undertake their consultation, they will consider striking a balance between rural and urban communities in controlling firearms.

Mr. McCabe: It does not make much sense to say that guns are focused in particular areas and assume that criminals will not travel. That is a strange suggestion. Surely—this would not affect sportsmen and those with other legitimate needs—we could say that a person must have an exceptionally strong need for a gun. We could ask why someone needs to buy 100 starting pistols or has a collection of replica guns that can be converted—

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. An intervention is meant to be more singular than plural.

Mr. Oaten: I agree with the hon. Gentleman to some extent on replica guns, because legitimate questions need to be asked in that respect. However, my point about different parts of the country is not about whether criminals can move around it but whether conditions should be placed on having a gun in a particular area.

Liberal Democrats support the establishment of the Serious Organised Crime Agency—SOCA—as a good and sensible measure, but will the Minister confirm that one of its responsibilities will be intelligence gathering on gun crime? That is not in the business plan for Customs and Excise, and it would be useful to know whether it will be one of SOCA's business plan objectives.

We have heard about the problem of purchasing fake guns on the internet. I would add to that the issue of eBay, where I have seen how remarkably easy it is to get into sites that sell guns. We must consider how to handle that as eBay grows in popularity. I should have thought that the people who run it would be amenable to a dialogue about how they introduce measures to control the situation.

In that context, I want to restate my concern about border control, which the Home Secretary dismissed at Home Office questions by saying that serious co-operation would be taking place through SOCA. However, it remains the case that where three bodies—Customs and the immigration and police authorities—have responsibility there is a danger of overlapping. That is not just my idea, or one for which the shadow Home Secretary has some warmth; it was the subject of a firm recommendation by the Select Committee on Home Affairs and has the support of the police. There is
 
18 Oct 2004 : Column 677
 
merit in reconsidering the issue, perhaps in a couple of years' time when SOCA finds that it needs particular help in those areas.

I want to move away from the issue of firearms to that of crime in general, which is the subject of the Conservative motion.

Mr. Nigel Jones (Cheltenham) (LD): Did my hon. Friend see last night's "Panorama" programme on the subject of blade crime, which concluded that a quarter of school children now take knives to school for protection and that probably only a third of those injured by knives report their cases to the police? Does he think that we need a review on blade crimes as well?

Mr. Oaten: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that, particularly given his own experiences. I did not see the "Panorama" programme, but clearly the number of knife crimes is a major cause for concern. The situation is different from that which applies to firearms, but some of the same issues apply—for example, the ability to purchase such knives and the way in which their sale over the internet is managed. There is a strong argument for considering how we should put such controls in place.

We have had a small debate about the police and police numbers. The police clearly play a front-line role in acting as a deterrent. It is almost inevitable that in the next six months, in the run-up to a general election, we will get involved in a bidding war between the three parties as to who can put the most police on the streets. I try to avoid that, but it is impossible because the question is asked so many times.

Mrs. Joan Humble (Blackpool, North and Fleetwood) (Lab) rose—

Brian Cotter (Weston-super-Mare) (LD) rose—

---