London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Bill

I have sympathy with all the amendments in this group. I apologise for not moving Amendment No. 34 but I could not be present at the Committee on Tuesday and I thought that it had already been debated. I will read what my noble friend says and perhaps come back to it at another stage. As noble Lords have already said, this group of amendments is extraordinary. Of course the Olympic site needs to be kept clean, as do all the sites. That includes the roads immediately outside and leading to them, as is the case with football stadiums. The mess one finds after a football game is clearly not an example that we would want to follow for the Olympic Games. But, as the noble Lord, Lord Dixon-Smith, asked, where does it stop? We shall be debating the transport plan and transport routes later on. Perhaps it is the transport routes—I hope that the Minister will tell us about them later—which will be kept spotlessly clean in order that the VIPs do not see any litter on the road. Does that apply not just to VIPs but also to the Olympic athletes? The noble Lord, Lord Dixon-Smith, gave the crazy example of someone coming from Scotland or Cornwall. I do not see why Clause 7(5)(c) is necessary. Paragraphs (a) and (b) would cover the need to keep the area reasonably clean—““reasonable”” is a good word—and we should stop there. Otherwise, every railway line with litter on it, every road, every footpath and every canal walk could in theory be covered by the provision. I am sure that the Minister does not want a bureaucratic army of millions of people going round picking up litter somewhere because one person happens to be walking to an Underground station or, let us say, Portsmouth station, to go to the Olympics. I look forward to the Minister’s reply.