§ 2.45 p.m.
§ Lord Swansea asked Her Majesty's Government:
§ How many police forces have so far stated their intentions of taking on additional staff in consequence of the passing of the Firearms (Amendment) Act, and how many people this comprises.
Earl FerrersMy Lords, the appointment of staff is a matter for individual chief officers of police. The information which the noble Lord requests is not kept centrally, and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
§ Lord SwanseaMy Lords, I am disappointed by my noble friend's reply because the information that I have obtained indicates that police forces throughout the country are taking on additional staff greatly in excess of the estimate of 80 additional staff which was foreshadowed at the time the Act was introduced.
Earl FerrersMy Lords, I had a funny feeling that my noble friend would be disappointed with that reply, but he will understand that chief officers are required to notify my right honourable friend the Home Secretary of the appointment of uniformed staff but not of the appointment of civilian staff. Therefore my right honourable friend does not know how many extra civilian staff have been taken on for these purposes.
My noble friend said that we expected 80 staff to be taken on. This was inevitably an assessment. we believed it to be a fair assessment and have no particular reason to think that the assessment was way out.
§ Lord MishconMy Lords, is the noble Earl aware that we on these Benches are still firmly behind the Government in their general policy in relation to the Firearms (Amendment) Act and very much hope that the passing of that Act will have a good effect on the Motion that the House is about to discuss?
Earl FerrersMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Mishcon. When he rose, I d id not expect him to say that he was firmly behind the Government, because that is not a familiar posture. However, I am grateful to him for that. 'The Firearms (Amendment) Act was introduced to try to preserve the peace and to take proper precautions over 231 dangerous weapons. I hope that it will have that effect.
§ Lord SwanseaMy Lords, further to my noble friend's reply, there is an uncomfortable feeling that this increase in bureaucracy, for want of a better word, will lead to a further swingeing increase in the fees for shotgun certificates. Can he confirm or deny that?
Earl FerrersMy Lords, the fees for certificates and registration should be set at an economic level to recover the full costs of the licensing system. The costs of increased manpower will be offset by an increase in the shotgun certificate fees, which have not yet been set.
§ Lord RentonMy Lords, on that matter, would not a small but modest increase in bureaucracy be well justified if fewer offences were committed with firearms?
Earl FerrersMy Lords, I think that my noble friend is right. There will be, as he puts it, a small but modest increase in bureaucracy, if by that he means the anticipated 80 extra people who will be required throughout the country to process this. I do not think that that figure is unreasonable.