I think that my noble friend is seeing difficulties where they do not really exist. The clear view was taken by the Calman commission, by the previous Labour Administration and by the present Government that firearms as a whole should not be devolved. We are trying to explain—and I apologise to your Lordships if I am not doing so sufficiently well—that the weapons that under Clause 11 are not being devolved fall more closely into the category of firearms than unregulated air weapons, which are being devolved. Therefore, we are maintaining a consistency with regard to weapons that are currently the subject of a licensing regime vis-à-vis weapons that are not currently the subject of a strict licensing regime.
My noble friend says that that could lead to a stricter licensing regime. I have to concede that that is technically possible if the Scottish Parliament sees fit to do that, although I would have thought that some of the compelling arguments made by my noble friend Lord Shrewsbury may well mean that a bit of common sense will prevail when it shapes these powers. That is the essence of devolution. If a power relating to air weapons is devolved, as long as it is consistent within the confines of the Scotland Act it is a question of how that power is exercised.
Scotland Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Wallace of Tankerness
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 2 February 2012.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Scotland Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
734 c1687 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 15:10:02 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_806961
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_806961
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_806961