Manchester City Council Bill [Lords](By Order)

My right hon. Friend's remarks are very important. I can assure him that we will not be blown off course by anybody. We will want to take evidence from anyone who wishes to give it to us, frankly, including—and I am absolutely certain of this—my hon. Friend the Member for Christchurch, who is a great expert on this subject and will no doubt have a great deal to say in giving evidence. Much has been said about pedlars. One fairly easy way of dealing with the problem is to include them in a schedule, which in my view would give a local authority a power, not a duty. In other words, each local authority would have the power to take action against pedlars if they caused a problem in their area, but they would not be obliged to do so. We should look carefully into that. It is interesting in that context to look at the Pedlars Act 1871. It may come as a surprise to most people—it certainly came as a surprise to me—that this Act, drawn up more than 100 years ago, contains a definition that is effectively the nub of what we are debating today. I refer to section 3 of the Act:"““In this Act, if not inconsistent with the context, the following terms have the meanings hereinafter respectively assigned to them; that is to say,—""The term 'pedlar' means any hawker, pedlar, petty chapman, tinker, caster of metals, mender of chairs, or other person who, without any horse or other beast bearing or drawing burden, travels and trades on foot and goes from town to town or to other men's houses, carrying to sell or exposing for sale any goods, wares, or merchandise, or procuring orders for goods, wares, or merchandise immediately to be delivered, or selling or offering for sale his skill in handicraft””." That is a wide-ranging definition and the opportunities for mischief within it are correspondingly wide. That is why I say to the hon. Member for Manchester, Central that it is very difficult to bring a prosecution—precisely for some of the reasons that he adduced—because it means watching people. Somebody—the police or somebody else—has to watch such people, see how long they stay in one place before moving on, ensure that the goods they sell are of merchandisable quality and that they do not abuse the street-trading regulations. They must be genuine pedlars. I gather that they have to be warned at least once and if they commit an offence a second time, which involves more monitoring and more watching, the police may be able to bring a prosecution. It would be interesting to know from the Minister how many prosecutions have been brought for contraventions of those market laws, not only by pedlars, but by other market traders. We should remember that these Bills deal with market traders as well as pedlars.