| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, I will address the four amendments in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Cottesloe.
The proposals currently in Clause 32 would require a person transferring a firearm or ammunition to another person who is not a registered firearm dealer or otherwise entitled to receive a firearm or ammunition without being a firearm certificate holder to do so in person rather than through the post or otherwise indirectly. These arrangements would ensure that only legitimate certificate holders, by virtue of an appropriate condition on their certificate, would be able to get hold of such materials.
The amendments tabled in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Cottesloe, would remove ammunition from that requirement. This would give rise to concern that some people, without appropriate credentials, would be able to deceive others into providing them with ammunition. The potential danger is that it would be
possible for large stocks of ammunition to be acquired in this way. We believe that that cannot be right. Ammunition in the wrong hands poses a serious threat to the public and I therefore hope that the amendments will not be pressed.I say two things in addition. I thank the noble Lord for discussing this with me personally. I promise him that we shall continue to look at this issue and to read the particular concerns of the noble Lord--of course without prejudice to the outcome.
Lord Cottesloe: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness for that reply, in the light of which I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendments Nos. 46 to 48 not moved.]
Clause 33 [Notification to chief officer of police of transfers involving firearms]:
Baroness Blatch moved Amendment No. 49:
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I spoke to this amendment with Amendment No. 44. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Baroness Blatch moved Amendment No. 50:
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I spoke to this amendment with Amendment No. 4. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 34 [Notification of de-activation, destruction or loss of firearms or ammunition]:
Baroness Blatch moved Amendments Nos. 51 to 55:
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, Amendments Nos. 51 to 55 were spoken to with Amendment No. 44. I beg to move.
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Baroness Blatch moved Amendment No. 56:
Page 14, line 31, leave out ("the United Kingdom") and insert ("Great Britain").
Page 14, line 32, after ("1") insert ("of the 1968 Act").
Page 15, line 3, after ("Where") insert (", in Great Britain,").
Page 15, line 4, leave out ("holder of the certificate") and insert ("certificate holder who was last in possession of the firearm before that event").
Page 15, line 7, after ("Where") insert (", in Great Britain,").
Page 15, line 9, leave out ("holder of the certificate") and insert ("certificate holder who was last in possession of the ammunition before that event").
Page 15, line 19, after ("section") insert ("and section (Notification of events taking place outside Great Britain involving firearms etc.) below").
After Clause 34, insert the following new clause--
(" .--(1) Where, outside Great Britain, any firearm or shot gun is sold or otherwise disposed of by a transferor whose acquisition or purchase of the firearm or shot gun was authorised by a firearm certificate or shot gun certificate, the transferor shall within 14 days of the disposal give notice of it to the chief officer of police who granted his certificate.
(2) A failure to give a notice required by subsection (1) above shall be an offence.
(3) Where outside Great Britain--
(a) a firearm to which a firearm or shot gun certificate relates is de-activated, destroyed or lost (whether by theft or otherwise); or
(b) any ammunition to which section 1 of the 1968 Act applies, and a firearm certificate relates, is lost (whether by theft or otherwise),
the certificate holder who was last in possession of the firearm or ammunition before that event shall within 14 days of the event give notice of it to the chief officer of police who issued the certificate.
(4) A failure without reasonable excuse to give a notice required by subsection (3) above shall be an offence.
(5) A notice required by this section shall--
(a) contain a description of the firearm or ammunition in question (including any identification number); and
(b) state the nature of the event and, in the case of a disposal, the name and address of the other party.
(6) A notice required by this section shall be sent within fourteen days of the disposal or other event--
(a) if it is sent from a place in the United Kingdom, by registered post or by the recorded delivery service; and
(b) in any other case, in such manner as most closely corresponds to the use of registered post or the recorded delivery service.").
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I spoke to this amendment with Amendment No. 44. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 35 [Penalty for offences under sections 32, 33 and 34]:
Baroness Blatch moved Amendment No. 57:
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I spoke to this amendment with Amendment No. 44. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 36 [Applications for certificates and referees]:
Lord Burton moved Amendment No. 58:
Page 15, line 23, leave out ("33 or 34") and insert ("33, 34 or (Notification of events taking place outside Great Britain involving firearms etc.)").
Before Clause 36, insert the following new clause--
(" . Her Majesty's Inspector of Constabulary for Scotland shall make an annual report to the Secretary of State on the administration of firearms licensing in Scotland, copies of which shall be laid before Parliament.").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 58, I should like to speak also to Amendment No. 59. The proposals which I put before your Lordships today should be a vital part of any firearms legislation. There seems to me to be an important omission from the Bill. No doubt I shall be told that we do not normally interfere with police administration, but I hope to explain to you why it is vital that something along the lines of these amendments should be included in this Bill.
Your Lordships will remember that on Second Reading it was made clear that neither Hungerford nor Dunblane would have occurred if the police had had proper procedures in place and they had been fully implemented. One would have expected action to be taken in this regard following Hungerford. However, if
That report was a production supplied to Lord Cullen and listed in Appendix 5. It was taken into consideration by Lord Cullen. The draft as at February 1996 of the thematic report for Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary for Scotland on the subject of the administration of the firearms licensing system in 1995 was referred to in evidence. Lord Cullen was also provided with a later draft of April 1996. He states,
Following the Dunblane disaster, the three clubs with which Hamilton was involved had all their documents seized by the police for the Cullen Inquiry and for the fatal accident inquiry which followed. One can imagine the difficulty that the secretaries faced in administering the clubs without those papers. Indeed, if this Bill had been enacted, the three secretaries concerned could have been liable for either a six-month gaol term or a substantial fine. The clubs could have been closed down.
In spite of pressure from a Scottish lawyer and inquiries from my noble friend Lady Blatch, it was only on the first afternoon of our Committee stage that the Clyde Valley club eventually managed to get its papers returned. The other two clubs have still not received their papers. The Clyde Valley papers confirm that Hamilton was not a member of that club when he applied for his full-bore certificate. That does not appear to have been checked by the police. What remains in the papers belonging to the other two clubs, we do not know. The police seem unwilling to return the papers to the clubs, even though we have been told that the Procurator Fiscal instructed the police to do so.
On Second Reading we were told that there was no cover-up. That is probably correct in regard to the Home Office. But beyond the jurisdiction of my noble friend Lady Blatch there seems undoubtedly to have been a cover-up in Scotland. If not, why were the club's documents returned so long after they were required for the fatal accident inquiry? Why can we not see the two draft thematic reports, which, even if they are now out of date, would certainly have been relevant to the disaster?
My noble friend will no doubt say that there has been no cover up. But if the police have made a successful cover up, how are my noble friends on the Front Bench to know? That is probably what has happened. Your Lordships will therefore see why I feel it necessary to write into the Bill that the police must provide reports on the firearms jurisdiction from time to time which will be available for public scrutiny to ensure that proper procedures are being operated in all constabularies and, indeed, that the firearms legislation is being operated in a proper and realistic manner.
I do not know and have never met ex-deputy Chief Constable Douglas McMurdo, who resigned. I am told by people who knew him that he was a kindly man; he is now a man broken in spirit. I was told that he feels severe hurt that he has been made a scapegoat for matters for which others may well have been responsible. I feel it is vital therefore that there is proper control if we are to avoid another disaster. I beg to move.
"I was informed that the decision whether or not the report should eventually be published, would be taken when I had completed my deliberations".
We were told in Committee that the decision was that of Lord Cullen. However, when one reads it, one finds that the decision was not entirely his.
9 p.m.
The Earl of Balfour: My Lords, there needs to be better provision for co-operation between individual chief constables in different parts of the country. The chief constables appear to have been heads of their little departments and not interested in what goes on outside. In principle, Amendment No. 58 deserves support to make for greater co-operation, even to the extent of the cross-borders between England and Wales. Better co-operation in covering firearms legislation and anything to do with firearms might be a great improvement.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page