Clause 78
Serious Crime Bill
10:45 am
Douglas Hogg (Sleaford and North Hykeham, Conservative)
I am grateful, Mr. Benton.
Having looked at the legislation that touches on firearms, I doubt whether the amendments are necessary—and I rather doubt whether clause 78 is necessary. However, the amendments at least enable us to explore that conclusion, and perhaps the Minister will give some reassurance.
Amendment No. 160 would ensure that the officer could not exercise the powers conferred on him by clause 78 unless he had reasonable grounds to suspect that firearms were present. That is intended to provide some additional safeguards for the citizen. At the same time, I would extend the power to search and seal to include noxious substances and explosives. The object is to cover the current situation with terrorism.
One needs to ask—I made my opening observation for this reason—what clause 78 brings to the party. What new powers does it confer on the constabulary? It is possible that it confers one—the power to seal off—but I am not sure that it extends the powers of the constabulary beyond that.
I am troubled by the fact that their lordships spent a lot of time on this in the other place. I know Lord Marlesford well, and have a great deal of respect for his judgment. I notice that he tabled this amendment, or something like it, on some three occasions and rallied to his cause a lot of noble Lords, who supported it and incorporated it in the Bill. Therefore, I approach the matter with some diffidence. However, I do have difficulty in understanding why they did that. Section 47 of the Firearms Act 1997 enables a constable, as now is, to stop a person whom he has reasonable grounds for believing to have a firearm, search him, detain him and, if necessary, search his vehicle as well. If I ask what section 78 of the Bill brings to the party, the answer is the sealing-off power, but I am not sure what is meant by sealing off that is not already provided by section 47.
Lord Marlesford attached considerable importance to the use of metal detectors, sensibly making the point that one can use metal detectors without carrying out a physical search, by running them up and down somebody’s clothing. I should have thought that the use of metal detectors already came within the power of search. I do not think that search necessarily means putting one’s hands in people’s pockets, but it could involve a metal detector if one wanted to use one.
Although it is not offensive in any way, I rather doubt that we need section 78. I should be grateful if the Minister would reassure the Committee on that point. Would he also be good enough to address my amendments? I have not checked this, but I suspect that there is already—in terrorism legislation and perhaps also in firearms legislation—a power to search where the officer has reasonable grounds to suppose that noxious substances or explosives are present. If that power does not exist, it should do, and in the absence of that power I would strongly recommend my amendments. However, I might have to support clause 78 in order to incorporate them into law.