I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford, for his support. The noble Lord, Lord Bassam, responded by saying that the Government like the idea of having more of a tribunal system and that they want something robust which has checks and balances. But then he accused me of trying to introduce a bureaucracy, when it appeared that the more he went into his explanation, the more his system became more bureaucratic than mine. There is a fundamental disagreement between us on what is needed on the face of the Bill to ensure a fair way in which the licence trade may make its appeals against what could be a significant payment by it on a monthly basis. I would never claim that the proposals put forward in my clauses are perfect. But they do represent my view that it is only fair that there should be an independent tribunal, not a bureaucracy, which would give fairness and equity to the licensed trade. It is on that basis that I will ask the opinion of the Committee.
On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 71) shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided: Contents, 41; Not-Contents, 44.
Violent Crime Reduction Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Anelay of St Johns
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 26 April 2006.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Violent Crime Reduction Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
681 c240 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:52:49 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_317652
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_317652
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_317652