COMMONS AMENDMENT (Hansard, 21 June 1982)

Lord Campbell of Croy
My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 5. This amendment is related to Amendment No. 1 which makes it an offence wilfully to injure deer in any of the cases where it would be an offence wilfully to kill them; that is to say under Sections 21 to 23 of the parent Act, the 1959 Act. The same principle should apply under Clause 7 of the 861 Bill under which the firearms order is to be made. This amendment will achieve that end.

§ Lord Northfield
My Lords, at an earlier stage of the Bill, having with the noble Lord, Lord Glenkinglas, raised the whole question of intentional injuries, I am delighted with this amendment; but, at the risk of breaking the harmony this evening, I must record my censure of the Government's insistence (which is still in the clause we are adding to here) on the use of shotguns at night. Under the Bill, unless authorised by the Red Deer Commission, occupiers may shoot only at red and sica at night.
As the number of sica in Scotland is small this, in practice, means that the only deer that occupiers in Scotland may shoot, or shoot at, at night, are red deer, animals standing 4 feet at the shoulder. This does us no good. I would guess that if the noble Lord, Lord Glenkinglas, is uncertain about any one part of the Bill, this must be the one which gives him the greatest concern. It should never have been left in this particular clause. I am well aware of what my Scottish friends feel about the Government's opinions in this matter.
May I say on this particular question of firearms, which is part of this amendment, that we shall soon be reaching the order which, after consultation, will be tabled under this clause, the order concerning the type of firearms. I want to give notice now so that there is no doubt when we reach this matter (and I think that others in this House and in another place will agree) that we shall have no hesitation is opposing the order if it is not acceptable and in pressing for better provision, even if it meant that the order would have to be delayed. We cannot have that story again. We have had it all through the Bill. When it comes to the order, we will not accept that argument. We really must fight this out as to whether the firearms order is adequate. I stress this in order to forestall possible accusations of holding up the vitally important control of weapons which can he used for killing deer.
My caveat also applies to any other order under this Bill; for example, the order specifying the records to be kept by licenced venison dealers. I say that now to avoid speaking when we come to that matter later. The Bill makes great improvements in the present position. The welfare of deer will be enhanced; the cruelty inflicted by inappropriate weapons, so long the source of grave disquiet, should be reduced. The callousness of deer poachers will be hit and the management of deer in Scotland will be improved. But we are left at this last stage with the whole question of weapons, and still saying that the Bill should have gone some distance further, that there should have been a total prohibition on shooting at night and there should have been some stronger provisions about weapons. I have a feeling that we shall all be here again before the decade it out, and I am sorry about this because we could have tackled matters more thoroughly in the present Bill. Nevertheless, as this amendment deals with an issue that I raised, I am glad to have it.

Lord Campbell of Croy
My Lords, I thought that this amendment would be welcome to your Lordships. The noble Lord, Lord Northfield, has fired his own warning shot about orders to come and the future with something of a good deal higher calibre than a shotgun.