Violent Crime Reduction Bill

I recognise that the amendment would strengthen the wording in Clause 12 and have the effect of requiring the Secretary of State to specify in regulations exactly what services the moneys raised by the compulsory charge can be spent on. I see where the noble Baroness is coming from with this amendment. We also want to ensure that the money raised goes to tackle alcohol-related crime and disorder, but the amendment is not necessary. The regulations will need to include the range of interventions covered by the charge and we can offer an assurance on that. The guidance will also cover the interventions which should be deployed. I do not doubt that those subjects will be covered in discussions with the police and local government associations. I also do not doubt that the associations will want to offer encouragement to their authorities on what is to be considered as best practice. We think that that approach will work best. The noble Baroness is right to be wary of local authorities going off on a frolic of their own. We certainly do not want to see that. I understand from my political background that that can happen from time to time. But we are aiming for practical and hard-nosed measures. If we reach a point where there is an alcohol-related crime and disorder problem in an area and it is necessary to put in place an alcohol disorder zone, by that stage exactly what is required will probably be understood by the local authority, the police and in all probability by many of the local businesses—in particular those in the trade of selling alcohol. The measures will focus on the particular needs of the community concerned. I understand the point being made in the amendment. We are at one with the noble Baroness in her objective, but this issue will be covered in regulations, guidance and no doubt, as I said, by best practice as well.