Violent Crime Reduction Bill

I am rather puzzled by the arguments that the Minister has adduced against my noble friend Lord Shrewsbury. I put that against the background of saying that I do not oppose the Government’s proposals in Clause 28, but the Minister certainly seems to be advancing different arguments from those adduced in another place. He addressed the argument about why the age limit of 18 is higher than it is for other certificated firearms by saying that it can be argued that the lack of a certificate requires a higher age limit. We have not heard that argument today, and we did not hear it in the debates in another place. We should hear that argument today if the Government feel that it is persuasive. Ministers said throughout the debates in another place that they sought consistency, which is why there are provisions in the Bill to raise age limits for purchasing bladed weapons, knives and crossbows—again, proposals that I do not oppose. But if the Government are now to shift their ground on the need for the clause and say that a higher age limit is necessary because of lack of certification, I do think that they should state that argument for the record today.