Meeting of the Parliament 23 April 2015
Yes, I know that—thank you very much.
Making everyone who wants to own or use an airgun apply for a licence is certainly not targeted. Why should innocent users who want to shoot for sport be forced to go through a cumbersome licensing process that charges for the privilege? I for one consider that, when there is a problem, a Government should seek to address it without imposing itself unnecessarily. Lazily casting the legislative net over every current and potential airgun user certainly breaches that principle, which is particularly worrying when the problem in question is confined to a tiny minority of users.
Furthermore, a vast new airgun licensing regime would bring practical difficulties. We estimate that, at the moment, there are around 500,000 airguns in Scotland, which are untraceable to all intents and purposes. For Police Scotland to license and track them would be very difficult—although I know that that is not proposed—and the people who are using those airguns will go under cover.
This question is crucial: is it in the public’s best interests to invest police time and resources on licensing airguns—or licensing people to use airguns—when Police Scotland increasingly faces budgetary constraints and pressures on its staffing infrastructure? Most people would think not.
I move on to the alcohol licensing provisions. First, I agree that overconsumption of alcohol is a very serious problem, which must be addressed. I also think that it is useful to clarify the licensing boards’ powers so as to avoid confusion or uncertainty in future. However, it is important that aspiring small business owners do not face unnecessary barriers to entry that their competitors do not have to face.
On a similar note, I remain concerned about licensing authorities’ potential power to refuse to grant a licence for a private hire vehicle on the grounds of overprovision. That is anti-competitive and simply not in the best interests of the people whom we should be helping: the consumers. Greater provision of private hire vehicles would allow more people to access that form of transport than ever before. However, this Government proposes to erect barriers to entry that would block consumer benefits, as well as prevent the creation of jobs in an expanding industry.
The mechanism to allow licensing authorities to require knowledge tests for drivers of private hire vehicles has a similar effect. I do not think that knowledge tests are necessary with the advent of TomTom, Garmin and satellite navigation. Furthermore, regulatory barriers to entry will restrict the industry’s growth, which will cost jobs and act against consumers’ interests. I will always maintain that Government should support innovation and refuse to protect vested interests from fair competition that they find inconvenient.
Having said all that, I am in agreement with some areas of the bill. The removal of the requirement for metal dealerships to hold metal for 48 hours before processing it is a welcome example of Government stepping back and removing costly regulation. On a visit to William Waugh scrap metal recyclers in Granton, I saw the large amount of space—and therefore expense—required to comply with that law. The provisions prohibiting payment in cash will also help to increase transparency, which will be beneficial provided that the definitions are clear.
As for the provisions on theatres, they may bring increased flexibility and consistency across the licensing of public entertainment venues, which would be welcome.
In a bill of so many parts, of which some are sensible, it would have been beneficial if the bill had been divided into two, as Alex Rowley stated.
It is clear that the bill will need to be amended substantially at the next legislative stage. As a result, I will lodge amendments at stage 2 that will seek to apply the principle of sensible, targeted government throughout the bill. Accordingly, I hope that the debate will draw out into the open the key areas of the bill in which work is still needed. I have touched on some aspects; my colleagues may come on to others.
On some aspects, such as the licensing of airguns, a considerable change in policy is required. However, I reiterate my view that some of the bill’s provisions appear to be sensible. From that position, I will seek to amend the bill to make its overall impact targeted, beneficial and fair.
The Scottish Conservatives will abstain when voting at decision time.
15:12