Justice (No. 2) Bill: Consideration Stage

Part of Executive Committee Business – in the Northern Ireland Assembly at 1:15 pm on 10 February 2016.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Alastair Ross Alastair Ross DUP 1:15, 10 February 2016

First, I will cover the Minister's intention to oppose clause 45, which enables the Department, by order, to make any supplementary, incidental, consequential, transitional or other provision necessary to give full effect to the provisions of the Act, and to replace it with amendment No 31, which the Committee for Justice supports. When speaking on the first group, Mr Maginness, who is not in his place, mentioned that, sometimes, we are not zealous enough in making sure that legislation does not go too far. I am quite sure that all members of the Committee — I know that Mr Kennedy missed this the last time with the Justice Bill — would agree that we were incredibly ferocious in making sure that the Department was not given too much power. I know that the Minister will remember that; there was almost a showdown at one stage between the Committee and the Minister.

The Committee, when scrutinising the Bill, raised its concerns about clause 86 in that Bill and the wide-ranging powers that it provided. The Committee was of the view that powers should be provided for an exact purpose rather than being broad and general in nature and, at that point, we agreed to oppose its inclusion. During the passage of that Bill through the Assembly, the clause was removed and replaced with one providing much narrower and more specific powers following a robust and, at times, heated debate with the Minister. He will, I am sure, be glad to know that we will not rehearse all the arguments against such a clause today.

In light of the Committee's position on clauses such as clause 45, the departmental officials, when briefing the Committee on the principles of the Justice (No. 2) Bill, indicated that they intended to revisit clause 45 with a view to bringing forward an amendment to reduce its scope. They subsequently advised the Committee that the intention was to remove clause 45 from the Bill in its entirety and to replace it with a power to make ancillary provisions under more restricted circumstances limited to Part 1, which covers fine collection and enforcement.

When considering the proposed amendment, the Committee sought clarification from the Department on the extent of the powers it provided and examples of when such powers are likely to be needed. The Committee welcomed the confirmation provided by officials that the amendment will provide the power to make consequential, incidental and supplementary changes by way of secondary legislation only to Part 1 and will not enable the Department to bring in anything new or different. The Committee noted the type of circumstances in which the Department will be allowed to use the powers.

Given the Committee's opposition to such clauses, we certainly welcome and support the intention to remove clause 45 and introduce a much narrower power to make ancillary provisions restricted to Part 1, as provided for through amendment No 31. That replicates the model developed in the previous Justice Bill and addresses the Committee's fundamental concerns with such clauses.

Turning to amendment No 58, the Department advised the Committee of its intention to bring forward an amendment to address a possible gap in the direct committal for trial provisions in section 9 of the Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2015. It had received advice that section 9 of the Act may not be sufficiently explicit to enable offences that are caught by article 45 of the Magistrates' Courts (Northern Ireland) Order 1981 and article 17 of the Criminal Justice (Children) (Northern Ireland) Order 1998 to attract direct committal arrangements where the prosecution decided to proceed on indictment. Given that the policy intention was that those cases should be capable of being directly transferred where it is decided to proceed on indictment, the Committee is content to support amendment No 58, which will put the matter beyond any doubt.

Turning briefly to amendment No 60, back in December 2015, the Department provided the Committee with the results of a consultation that it had undertaken on fee options to enable the Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunals Service to introduce a new full cost recovery charging model for 2016 to ensure that the cost of administering the Court Funds Office is met by fees charged to service users rather than the general taxpayer and advised that a change to the relevant legislation by way of an amendment to this Bill will be required to introduce the required authority. The Committee agreed that it was content for the change to be made to the fee structure for the Court Funds Office and therefore supports amendment No 60.

I will now cover amendment Nos 59 and 82, which deal with changes to the firearms legislation. This issue has been in the sights of the Committee for some time, so I am glad that it has been brought to the Chamber today. Indeed, the Committee has been considering proposals from the Department to increase firearms licensing fees and to make a range of other amendments to the firearms legislation that applies in Northern Ireland, including the age of young shooters, since as far back as May 2012 and has invested considerable time and effort in scrutinising that policy area. Whether that is the silver bullet that solves everyone's concerns is still questionable, but the Committee has had its resident experts on the matter, none more so than Mr McGlone, although it is fair to say that all the Committee members now know a lot more about the various guns and calibres than we ever thought we could or perhaps will ever need to know.

At this point, I will pay tribute to Mr McGlone. I know he has left the Committee, and I thank him for his contribution, not just on this issue, but it is always easier to defer to somebody who knows considerably more about a subject than you do. Mr McGlone, along with Mr Frew and Mr Poots at times, has certainly led the Committee in dealing with and resolving the issue, hopefully to the satisfaction of most of the organisations. We are most grateful for that. He has also made a wider contribution to the Committee, and I just want to put that on record.

I do not intend to cover the amendments in detail, particularly the new banded system that will enable firearms dealers to exchange a firearm for a licence holder within a band as long as certain conditions are met, as I am sure that Mr McGlone, Mr Frew and others will do that. However, I think it is important to set out the background to the Committee's decision to support amendment Nos 59 and 82.

During the three and a half years that the Committee has been considering the proposals to change the firearms legislation, it has taken a wide range of written and oral evidence from all the key firearms stakeholder organisations, including the British Association for Shooting and Conservation, Gun Trade Guild Northern Ireland, Countryside Alliance Ireland, the Ulster Clay Pigeon Shooting Association, the Federation of Shooting Sports and the Northern Ireland Deer Society. The Committee also discussed the proposals with the Department of Justice and PSNI officials on numerous occasions.

From the outset, it was clear that there was a wide divergence of views on the proposals, and the Committee encouraged the Department to engage with the various stakeholders and to undertake meaningful dialogue with a view to presenting an agreed set of changes. Following a protracted period during which little progress appeared to have been made, in June 2015 several MLAs tabled amendments to the Justice Bill at Further Consideration Stage on firearms fees, the age of young shooters and a banded system. That shot across the bows brought matters to a head, and officials advised the Committee that, following further discussions, a level of agreement had been reached between the Department and the main firearms stakeholder organisations on fees and bands. As a result, the Members did not move the amendments to the Justice Bill to enable the Department to bring forward legislative amendments as part of the Bill that is in front of us this afternoon, hence the amendments that have been tabled.

The Committee received a range of written submissions on the firearms amendments and took oral evidence from representatives of the British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC), the Gun Trade Guild Northern Ireland and Countryside Alliance. While some issues required further clarification, there was broad agreement on the proposed new banded system and the fee structure. However, those organisations remained opposed to the Minister's intention to reduce the minimum age for supervised shooting with a shotgun to 12 years of age for clay target shooting only in a club approved by the PSNI, and they suggested that that should apply to shooting clay targets and any other lawful quarry.

They also considered the proposed introduction of shotgun clubs as creating a totally unnecessary level of bureaucracy. As the Minister outlined, he does not agree with that position and believes that the amendment on the age of young shooters that is before the Assembly today is appropriate and is accepted by a number of other firearms stakeholders. Whilst there is still opposition from some of the firearms organisations to the proposed change to the age of young shooters, the Committee is pleased that an accommodation has been reached regarding the banded system and the fees and is content, therefore, to support amendment Nos 59 and 82.

The rest of the amendments in this group are largely consequential to other changes to the Bill. The Department advised the Committee of most of those amendments and provided the draft text of them before scrutiny of the Bill was completed. The Committee had no other issues to raise.