§ 6. Mr. Farrasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will seek powers designed to reduce the amount of illegal importation of offensive weapons and firearms from abroad.
§ Mr. Roy JenkinsNo, Sir. Additional powers are not needed, though I recognise that enforcement may present difficulties.
§ Mr. FarrIn view of the fact that the police have confiscated over 500,000 illegal weapons, such as pistols, in this country since the war, most of which were improperly imported, is there not now a good case for a tighter control on passengers' luggage coming into the country, including random checks and possibly some form of electronic surveillance?
§ Mr. JenkinsI am willing to consider any matters put to me. This is to a large extent a matter for the Customs and Excise, who are responsible not to me but to the Chancellor of the Exchequer—although, in a sense, I am responsible for the consequences and, naturally, I pay great attention to this matter. The Customs and Excise are well aware of the dangers involved and, given the total number of people involved, have considerable success in managing to exercise controls along the lines suggested by the hon. Gentleman.
§ Mr. Christopher PriceIs my right hon. Friend aware that since yesterday's outrage at the Tower of London there will be far greater pressure to take much more seriously offences involving the bringing of weapons into the country? Is he further aware that one of my constituents was killed yesterday and several of the family were injured in the explosion at the Tower? I have been visiting those constituents and people in my constituency this morning. There is a great sense of outrage and a feeling that the Government must put all their resources into making sure that this does not happen again.
§ Mr. JenkinsI am aware that the lady who died in yesterday's outrage was a constituent of my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, West (Mr. Price). I note what he said, which is a reiteration of comments from all parts of the House 641 when I made my statement yesterday evening. The Government's position—which, if anything, is intensified by yesterday's incident—is that we have a determination to use any powers which, on a sensible consideration of the situation, we feel will help us to restrict the dangers to which we are subjected. We would be willing to introduce measures of control which would be conducive to that end. I reiterate that point of view, as did the Conservative Government before me. Unless we can be clear how any such measures would help, it is not necessarily sensible merely to propound in general the desirability of tighter security.
§ Mrs. Kellett-BowmanWill the Home Secretary accept that, although he is willing to introduce powers which he is convinced will reduce the dangers to our citizens, the vast majority of people are convinced that it is more than ever imperative that we should reintroduce capital punishment for these crimes which cause death and mutilation among so many of our citizens? Will he put the matter to the test by bringing in a Bill?
§ Mr. JenkinsNo, I shall not bring in a Bill which I do not believe to be correct—any more than I believe the hon. Lady would do if she were occupying my office—or, indeed, any more than the Conservatives did when they were in Government. I am not convinced on this matter. I am aware that in present circumstances it is easy for people to feel strongly on these matters—I sympathise with their strong feelings—but it is important that decisions should not be taken in the heat of the moment. I find it difficult to see the argument that terrorism would be uniquely responsive to a capital deterrent. I think that of all capital crimes it is probably the one which would be the least uniquely responsive. If hon. Members think about this matter, they may come to the conclusion that there is considerable force in this point.
§ Mr. MolloyWill my right hon. Friend acknowledge that there is bitterness and anguish in the hearts of ordinary people about what is going on? I agree that any frenetic approach would be wrong, but because it is repugnant that people should seek to smuggle arms and offensive weapons into the country, the situation should be subject to the most severe 642 scrutiny and anybody caught should be subjected to the most excessive punishment along civilised lines, since the idea behind these moves is to harm innocent people.
§ Mr. JenkinsI take note of what my hon. Friend said. The Question is poised between discussing firearms and discussing explosives, which is a rather different matter. If people are caught bringing firearms into the country, of course steps will be taken. It is an offence to bring rifles, pistols or revolvers into the country without proper authority, but the law has to be applied and on certain occasions people may bring weapons into the country provided that they declare them. For example, they can bring in rifles or shooting guns for legitimate purposes. The law has to be properly applied, but it will be applied as stringently as possible.
§ Sir K. JosephWill the Home Secretary accept that I have no quarrel with his answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Lancaster (Mrs. Kellett-Bowman), but that I doubt whether many of his Labour colleagues sitting behind him are right to dismiss so cavalierly what my hon. Friend said? Does he accept that he and I—who have up to the present, and, so far as I am concerned, still, shared the same point of view about capital punishment—have failed so far to persuade the majority that we are right. We still have a job to do to persuade the public, a large number of whom agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Lancaster, namely, that, particularly in the case of dedicated terrorists, what is happening at present may not be the appropriate treatment. Will he accept that some of his hon. Friends should not dismiss so derisively the widespread views of the public?
§ Mr. JenkinsI am grateful for what the right hon. Gentleman began by saying, but I thought that he was trying to have it both ways towards the end of what he said. I think that one is bound to state clearly to the public what one believes to be the case. I regard the horror of yesterday's event as such that, if I believed that the restoration of capital punishment would prevent a repetition, I should be bound to overcome my deep-seated repugnance for such a penalty. But I am not so convinced. I do not 643 begin to be so convinced. As I said in reply to the hon. Member for Lancaster (Mrs. Kellett-Bowman), I think that there has never been effective evidence that it is a unique deterrent. Least of all do I believe that it would be a unique deterrent against the lunatic fanatics with whom we are dealing in these circumstances. I cannot be unaware—I am sure that the right hon. Member for Leeds, North-East (Sir K. Joseph) or anyone who may occupy my position in the future could not be unaware—of the difficulties under our judicial process which would have to apply, in which we would have terrorists imprisoned for several weeks and possibly months, under sentence of death, and the consequences which could follow from that.