UK Parliament / Open data

Violent Crime Reduction Bill

I warmly thank the Minister for her constructive approach to my amendments. I think that we all want to ensure that someone who said, ““Please transport my bladed article across the city and give it to me at the other side, because I intend to do something with it tonight which I do not want to tell you about because it is not very kind”” would be guilty of an offence. It was very thoughtful of the Minister to say that she would consider the matter. This is a rare situation. The Minister has been kind enough to express sympathy with two of my amendments, and she is thinking of acting on them. I may achieve a first before long and have an amendment accepted by the Government, even if my drafting is not quite up to it. Let me return to the important principle of a maximum sentence. I repeat that it is a maximum, not a minimum. Conservative Members believe that a maximum sentence of two years for carrying a bladed article is too low, in view of the enormous increase in such offences. The Minister said that the maximum sentence for carrying an offensive weapon was four years. We do not need to discuss what constitutes an offensive weapon; we know that a knuckleduster, for instance, is an offensive weapon per se. On the other hand, items made or adapted for offensive purposes can also come under the definition of offensive weapons. A perfectly innocent item such as a baseball bat, or a cricket bat—I apologise to the cricketers among us, if there are any—[Interruption.] I understand that there are distinguished cricketers on the Conservative Benches; and I forgot to mention your vital role, Mr. Deputy Speaker, in relation to parliamentary cricket, which is on our minds all the time and is much appreciated. Anyway, carrying a cricket bat in public with unlawful intent would put someone in the frame for carrying an offensive weapon. Actually, I would rather come across someone carrying a cricket bat in public than a bladed article. On that note, I believe that it is important to test the House’s opinion on whether the maximum sentence for a vicious, nasty offence of carrying a bladed article in public should, in these difficult times, be lifted to five years maximum. I believe that it should and I hope that the House does, too.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

439 c739 

Session

2005-06

Chamber / Committee

House of Commons chamber
Back to top