It is a genuine pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Cotswold (Mr. Clifton-Brown), whose opening remarks reminded me of the one previous time that I engaged seriously with private Bill business. It was on the City of London (Ward Elections) Bill and a particularly traumatic experience, because a combination of the chief executive of the City of London and my hon. Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) ensured that that Bill took an awfully long time to get through the House. As a result of that formative experience, I have studiously avoided private Bill business up to now.
Nevertheless, it is a pleasure to represent the Government in this debate, not least for the opportunity to listen to my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Central (Tony Lloyd). I was almost tempted to say that he made an extremely cogent case for the Bill that he sponsors today—I say ““almost tempted”” because, as he will understand, it is a tradition that Governments do not offer views on private Bills. That, and the fact that the lumped me in with the hon. Member for Christchurch (Mr. Chope), makes me hesitate to endorse completely the points that he made. Nevertheless, he dealt with many of the points that Opposition Members raised with him.
The Government have reflected on the opinions set out in letters to my Department from town centre managers and bodies representing licensed street traders, and on how the proposed legislation might affect the existing framework of law that affects street trading, and indeed the very old statute that relates to certified pedlary. I understand why some local authorities favour the changes set out in the Bills, and I recognise that some face particular difficulties with street trading. It is true that some of the difficulties may be caused by certified pedlars, but difficulties may equally be caused by traders acting outside either street trading or pedlar legislation.
Unsurprisingly, some of the views stated in the debate echo the sentiments expressed by some noble Lords who contributed to the debate on the Bournemouth Borough Council Bill and the Manchester City Council Bill last November in the other place. As has been made clear, a number of interested parties believe strongly that there should be additional national street trading legislation.
As well as the views expressed on one side of the debate, other views of course need to be considered. I am sure that some hon. Members have constituents who make their living as certified pedlars and whose livelihoods may be affected by changes to the law. Equally, some constituents whose interests are represented by hon. Members will benefit from the activity of legitimate pedlars. Their views must also be considered.
As I made clear, it is not my role to offer a view on behalf of the Government on the contents of the private Bills. It is my specific role to confirm my view that the Bills' promoters have undertaken a full assessment of their compatibility with the European convention on human rights and that we do not see a need to dispute their conclusions.
The hon. Member for Cotswold and, I suspect, one or two others raised the specific issue of the number of similar private Bills affecting the regulation of licensed street trading and certified pedlary. Seven private pieces of legislation affect street trading in addition to the Bills under discussion. However, hon. Members should bear it in mind that that is in the context of 410 city and borough councils in England and Wales. In saying that, I acknowledge that further similar private Bills may be introduced later this year. In addition, my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton, South-East (Dr. Iddon) has led a campaign, including through the private Member's Bill that he has introduced, for a national street trading Act, creating additional local authority powers to regulate street trading and pedlary.
The evidence at the moment for national legislation across all 410 local authority borough and district councils in England and Wales remains unclear. I have no doubt that there are particular problems in some areas, as some hon. Members have alluded to in the debate. However, it is not clear whether they are spread nationwide. In principle, it is our view that they are local matters best tackled in communities by local authorities.
Manchester City Council Bill [Lords](By Order)
Proceeding contribution from
Gareth Thomas
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 12 June 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Manchester City Council Bill [Lords](By Order).
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
477 c537-8 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:17:04 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481475
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481475
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481475