The noble Viscount is a little unfair in using the word ““whim””. I cannot imagine a local authority designating an alcohol disorder zone unless it is pretty sure that these conditions are met. I generally agree with the noble Viscount that objective tests are better than subjective ones. But the likelihood of repetition of the nuisance, annoyance or disorder, as set out in subsection (1)(c), must be based on the sensible appreciation of the situation by somebody—in this case, the local authority. It cannot be objectively satisfied. In this particular instance, I think that the amendment should not be carried.
Violent Crime Reduction Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Borrie
(Labour)
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 c242-3 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_317657
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_317657
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_317657