Clause 1. — (Prohibition of Poaching.)

Part of the debate – in the House of Commons at 12:00 am on 24 January 1951.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mr James Stuart Mr James Stuart , Moray and Nairnshire 12:00, 24 January 1951

I have on the Order Paper an Amendment which deals with gear, and I am attempting to speak about that Amendment. I will try to make myself clear. As I said, I think that that deterrent is one of the best ways of stopping poaching, if that is our desire and intention. Prevention is the best form of cure, and I should have thought that if the fear of the poacher included the fear of the possible loss of his rod or gear it might act as an effective form of deterrent.

It would, of course, operate only in appropriate cases. As an hon. Member opposite said earlier, we all know that the fines are maximum. In cases before the sheriff fines vary from £1 to £2, £3 or £4, but in the case of the hardened poacher the fear that he might forfeit his gear would be a very effective way of attempting to stop the poaching with which we are dealing. I was interested in a letter which appeared in the "Scotsman" on 5th January, in which it is stated: Under the Bill the 'decent' poacher"— the word "decent" is not his own word, he is quoting from HANSARD— will be better off on conviction than he is under the law as it stands. His rod and relative gear will no longer be liable to forfeiture. I hope that the Lord Advocate will give sympathetic consideration to the Amendment which has been moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Dumfries (Mr. N. Macpherson) and to my own Amendment because I hope that all of us have the same object in view. I think that if my hon. Friend the Member for Dumfries has expounded the matter accurately, as I am sure he has done, what he has suggested is what we ought to aim at. I hope that the Government will agree with us.