Violent Crime Reduction Bill

Again, my hon. Friend makes a good point—I cannot but agree with him—but in a sense he reinforces the fact that we simply do not know what the Government have in mind under the Bill. We would like to know what they have in mind. Amendment No. 16 takes the matter not much further in the sense that it is a repetition in a different part of the Bill of a point that I made earlier, and it is to the effect that the charges should be"““commensurate with the level of responsibility for alcohol-related disorder . . . of the persons or clubs so charged.””" Surely the Minister would feel it appropriate to accept amendment No. 8. Clause 12(7)(b) states that the Secretary of Sate ““may”” by regulation make provision about the payment, collection and enforcement of charges. I may have misunderstood the word ““may””—it may have some parliamentary meaning that has completely escaped me—but I am not sure about that. It seems that the word ““may”” means that she may or may not. I see absolutely no reason why the word ““must”” should not go into the Bill, as I suggest in amendment No. 8. Likewise, amendment No. 7 says that the regulations should deal with the imposition of charges, which is to say the basis on which charges are imposed on licensed premises. Amendment No. 9 is quite important and relates to clause 12(8)(b), which states that the Secretary of State may by regulation make provision about"““appeals against decisions determining such questions.””" The appeals point is very important indeed. My amendment suggests that the appeals should be made to the court. The reason I tabled that amendment is, yet again, that the Government have included the most vague statement: they may make regulations about appeals. We must face the fact that some licensed premises or, indeed, trade organisations will decide that they want to appeal against the imposition of such charges on their own premises. What can we debate about the appeal? Bills that relate to crime normally at least include a provision of appeal to a court and deal with matters such as legal aid. One can get one’s teeth into that, but it seems quite vague to say that regulations can make provision about appeals. Can the Minister specifically tell us today to whom the appeals will be made? Is there an undoubted provision for appeal? Who has the ability to overturn—if she thinks that it is not improper to overturn—the decision of the local authority? Amendment No. 12, which is linked to this group, relates to a different clause, which deals with selling alcohol persistently to children—one of the new offences that we discussed at some length in Committee. My amendment is simply a probing amendment. Whereas I always thought that it was an offence to sell alcohol to under-18s, the Government suggest another offence of persistently selling alcohol. There might be another offence next year of persistently selling alcohol persistently. It is either an offence or it is not. The Minister may tell me how many people have been charged in the past 12 months with selling alcohol to under-18s. Does she know? Perhaps she would like to intervene to tell me now, because that might shorten my next comments. It appears that she is not entirely sure whether anyone has been charged with the existing offence under the law.