ADDITIONAL POWERS IN RESPECT OF LICENSING AND REGULATION OF SALMON DEALING (Hansard, 23 October 1986)

§ Mr. John MacKay
I beg to move amendment No. 16, in page 18, line 25, at end insert 'but not so as to enable these powers to be exercised in any dwellinghouse or any yard, garden, outhouses and pertinents belonging thereto or usually enjoyed therewith'. As the House knows, some misgivings have been expressed about the possible extent of the powers of search and entry that may be given to water bailiffs under dealer licensing. We had a long debate on the subject in Committee. I have reflected on it and am conscious of the continuing worry on the matter, and I think that it would be desirable to carry the undertaking that I gave in Committee into the Bill. I hope that the House will welcome the amendment.

§ Mr. Home Robertson
It was an understatement for the Minister to say that there are misgivings about this matter. I stress that the Opposition support the principle of dealer licensing and we are glad that it has been beefed up during the passage of the Bill, because it would have been absurd if, as the Government originally suggested, dealer licensing had applied only to Scotland. To be effective it must be a national scheme.
However, I am very worried that the Government have jettisoned several fundamental civil liberties to make it easier to enforce the dealer licensing system. In Committee we discussed bailiffs and their powers of search and entry, and we welcome the concession in the amendment, which will at least prevent bailiffs from entering and searching people's homes and gardens.
The Minister knows that we are profoundly worried about the way in which bailiffs are selected, appointed and controlled and governed. Obviously we need people to enforce the regulations—that is what bailiffs are meant to do—but the Bill gives wide powers to people who are, in effect, the appointees of the proprietors and do not have to be vetted by the police or have formal training. Indeed, I understand that some foreigners have been appointed as temporary bailiffs. People from South Africa and goodness knows where else have been taking on such jobs.
I acknowledge that the vast majority of bailiffs are honest and conscientious people who do an important job responsibly, but we have all heard the horror stories, and we related some of them in Committee. We heard a lot about what was happening on the Grimersta estate in the Western Isles. More recently I heard that a bailiff on the North Harris estate broke somebody's jaw in the course of carrying out his duties. In another case, another bailiff on the same estate threatened to "shoot like a seal", as he put it, somebody who he found swimming in the loch in that area. There are some hair-raising bailiffs going around, and something ought to be done about the way in which such people are trained, vetted and governed.
There is a need for better provisions for governing bailiffs, and it would be intolerable for such people to go into people's homes. We are certainly thankful for small mercies and welcome the significant concession made by the Minister. He has at least made it clear that such people will not be allowed to enter people's homes and gardens and buildings around their homes in the course of their investigations.

§ Mr. Gordon Wilson (Dundee, East)
I welcome the Minister's amendment. I was entranced by the prospect of South Africans wielding sjamboks while patrolling our rivers, but the hon. Member for East Lothian (Mr. Home Robertson) was right to spell out some of the nasty incidents that have taken place. One of the objections that many had to the original provisions was the idea that water bailiffs could have powers that would not necessarily be held by the police. Even if they were held by the police, they should never be conferred on people without qualifications or training in the work that they are doing. The amendment is useful for the protection of civil liberties and on that basis I agree with it.

§ Mr. John MacKay
I beg to move amendment No. 17, in page 18, line 26, leave out subsection (2).
Members of the Committee will remember that this amendment was tabled by Opposition Members who expressed some doubts about this clause. Their doubts centred on possible loopholes and I said at the time that I understood the difficulties. With some trepidation, I am now doing that which I was asked to do. I hope that that does not mean that we are to have a long debate about it, as happened on the last amendment. I understand the difficulties and the best way to resolve them is to remove subsection (2) so that nothing is pre-empted. In the order introducing the dealer licensing scheme we will specify the class or classes of salmon or dealings in salmon that are to be excluded from the scheme. I am doing what the Committee asked me to do, and I hope that will be welcomed.