Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: Thomas Docherty's Private Members Bill

  1. #1

    Thomas Docherty's Private Members Bill

    Dear All

    I just wanted to update you about Thomas Docherty's Private Members Bill, Firearms (amendment) Act, which seeks to introduce a minimum age for holding a shotgun certificate of fourteen.

    We have spoken to Mr Docherty on several occasions about his Bill and have briefed him on the current law and the advantages of introducing children to shooting at a young age.

    The Bill did not get read on Friday. It is now 6th on the order paper for this Friday (27th) and is again very unlikely to be heard. It should continue to slip down the order paper and will die at the end of this session which is likely to be May.

    David

  2. #2

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by David BASC View Post
    Dear All

    I just wanted to update you about Thomas Docherty's Private Members Bill, Firearms (amendment) Act, which seeks to introduce a minimum age for holding a shotgun certificate of fourteen.

    We have spoken to Mr Docherty on several occasions about his Bill and have briefed him on the current law and the advantages of introducing children to shooting at a young age.

    The Bill did not get read on Friday. It is now 6th on the order paper for this Friday (27th) and is again very unlikely to be heard. It should continue to slip down the order paper and will die at the end of this session which is likely to be May.

    David
    Good riddance, what a waste of effort, hasn't this M.P. got some important issue concerning his constituency to deal with rather than stirring up non-issues!

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by timbrayford View Post
    Good riddance, what a waste of effort, hasn't this M.P. got some important issue concerning his constituency to deal with rather than stirring up non-issues!
    He was, quite obviously, hoping it would be a vote winner come re-election. Kids, Guns, Outraged Mothers etc. I don't think he expected quite such a robust defence from the legitimate shooting community and their representative organisations. Congratulations BASC, another reminder of why I pay my membership

  5. #5
    We still need to keep an eye on the ball as he could try and bring it back in the new session, or get someone else to try!

    David

  6. #6
    David,

    Just a slight clarification on this. The Bill was not debated on Friday, but the title was read at the end of proceedings. If no MP shouted "object" during the reading of the title, the Bill would have been considered to have had it's second reading and would proceed to committee stage. The Countryside Alliance arranged for an MP to object to the title, thus delaying the Bill.

    You are correct that we need to keep an eye on this, as he is quite determined - I have just finished another interview on BBC Radio Humberside against Thomas Docherty. My original Radio 4 interview (pre debate) and our report can be found here on the following link:

    http://www.thestalkingdirectory.co.u...e-and-Shotguns


    Thanks,
    David
    Last edited by Quercus; 24-01-2012 at 13:53.

  7. #7
    I agree, thanks for the clarification, it was 4th on the list and did not even get read last Friday.

    Simply reading out the name of the Bill does not constitute a 2nd reading of the Bill. The 2nd reading is the important one; it’s where the principles of the Bill are aired and debated.

    As it was so low on the list the chances of it being read out and debated last Friday were always very remote indeed.

    As the Bill was not debated it has to stay on the list of Private Members Bills for this session, and is allocated another date but slips further down the list- its currently 6th I belive.

    To all intents and purposes this is completely dead.

    As you know David, its very common for the Whips office to put up a MP to ‘object’ to the Bills on the list.

    Best to all

    David

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by David BASC View Post
    Simply reading out the name of the Bill does not constitute a 2nd reading of the Bill. The 2nd reading is the important one; it’s where the principles of the Bill are aired and debated.
    David, that is incorrect, as a Private Members' Bill the second reading does not require a debate - simply a reading of the title without objection constitutes a second reading. If no 'object!' was cried, the second reading would have passed on Friday.

  9. #9
    We must of course remain ever vigilant about this sort of thing. Is it correct that ACPO supported the Bill? If so that is an absolute disgrace!

  10. #10
    Tim - Adrain Whiting (ex head of ACPO) was pushed to suggest a minimum age to the Home Affairs Committee in 2010, he suggested 10 was the minimum age.

Similar Threads

  1. Richard and Thomas Jackson, Gunmakers.
    By JAYB in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 18-09-2012, 06:42
  2. private message
    By poppins in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-12-2011, 12:39
  3. *SOLD* Thomas Crown Tweed Hoodie
    By Spoony in forum Clothing & Footwear
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-09-2011, 17:13
  4. Imogen Thomas
    By Dan Gliballs in forum Jokes & Funnies
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 28-05-2011, 08:17
  5. message Peter Thomas new member
    By peter thomas in forum Introductions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-11-2010, 23:18

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •