Firearms (Hansard, 3 December 1987)

§ 11. Mr. McAllion
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has received on the present legal restrictions on the possession and use of firearms; and if he will make a statement.

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Douglas Hogg)
We have received some 900 letters from right hon. and hon. Members, and over 4,500 from members of the public, including secretaries of rifle and pistol clubs. We have also received correspondence from shooting organisations, police and local authority representatives and a number of other bodies with an interest in the review of firearms controls. Although many, but not all, shooting interests oppose some of the proposals that we have announced, they seem otherwise to have been well received generally.

§ Mr. McAllion
Yesterday the Home Secretary told the House that he saw no reason for clamping down on the sale of legitimate items by mail order. Will the Minister tell the House which potentially lethal weapons he thinks can be legitimately sold by mail order and what steps the Government intend to take to ensure that such weapons do not find their way into the hands of individuals who may cause a threat to public order?

§ Mr. Hogg
The important thing is to get the controls themselves right, and that we have done. Mail order is simply a technique for selling, and there is no particular reason for tackling a particular technique.

§ Mr. Bellingham
Is the Minister aware that since the White Paper was published yesterday many Norfolk farmers and legitimate sportsmen have contacted me to 1096 express their concern about the legitimate use of guns in their sport? Will the Minister undertake that their sporting freedom will not be impaired?

§ Mr. Hogg
We have very much in mind the legitimate interests of the shooting community. That is why we introduced the checks. When we come to consider the meaning of "good reason" in the context of shotgun control, we shall give such guidance as will protect the legitimate interests of my hon. Friend's constituents.

§ Mr. William Ross
On the basis of the number of legally held guns and stolen legally held guns used to commit murders in the past few years, how many lives does the Minister expect his proposals to save, and on what authority does he base any such estimate?

§ Mr. Hogg
We are in the business of reducing risk. That is what this country expects of us.

§ Mr. Soames
Is my hon. Friend aware that all those who use guns legally will be delighted with the way in which our right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has struck such an excellent balance on these difficult proposals? Does he agree that it is very much his Department's duty to monitor the proposals carefully— in particular their effect on gun clubs?

§ Mr. Hogg
I am grateful to my hon. Friend. The answer is yes, Sir.

§ Mr. Hattersley
On 26 October the hon. Gentleman expressly ruled out the application of the good reason criteria to shotguns. Is that not now Government policy?

§ Mr. Hogg
The right hon. Gentleman was not listening on 26 October. I expressly ruled out section 1 control. The present proposals are different.

§ Mr. Key
Will my hon. Friend explain why he has decided to omit from his review the function of proof houses? Will he explain why proof houses, which were successfully privatised in the 17th century, and, to the mystery of gunmakers, are still relevant to the debate, should be excluded from any kind of control, when every gun in the country has to be proofed in one of the two houses in Birmingham and London?

§ Mr. Hogg
For present purposes we are looking at the Firearms Act 1968. My hon. Friend has raised an interesting point about proof houses, and I look forward to discussing the matter with him.