I have not even got out of the starting blocks, yet I have been intervened on three times. I am more than delighted to be intervened on, but let me try to put forward a case for looking at the provisions in further detail.
I hope that my hon. Friend would agree that our objective in Parliament is to allow the democratic process to take its course. More than 70 authorities are thinking about similar proposals. Is he saying that they are all wrong? Why not give an opportunity to debate the issue in more detail? He is saying, ““Throw it out!”” whereas I am saying, ““Give it a little more time, then let's make an assessment later on,”” which could include hearing from the good people of Bridgwater.
I was in the middle of paying tribute to Lord Eden of Winton, who did such an amicable job of moving the Bournemouth Borough Council Bill through its various stages in the House of Lords, where it received an awful lot of scrutiny. I recommend that hon. Members read the Hansard reports of those debates, which are so applicable to what we are talking about today.
I was pleased to hear an indication from the Minister that we will consider the matter in more detail. I am sorry to hear that the provisions will not be in the Queen's Speech—we have already heard from the Prime Minister what will be in it, and the report that we are due to receive will not come until autumn.
The summary of the Bournemouth Borough Council Bill is: to make provisions relating to street trading and consumer protection in the area of Bournemouth; in particular to allow the council to regulate services offered on the street as well as the sale of goods; to alter the exemption enjoyed by the holders of the pedlars certificates from the street trading regime in the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982; to empower council officers or the police to seize goods and equipment when they believe a street trading offence has been committed; and to empower the courts to order the forfeiture of such articles.
Why is that being called for? The existing laws, I am afraid, are simply not working. The situation in Canterbury that my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Canterbury (Mr. Brazier) described also applies in Bournemouth. We have confusing and out-of-date laws. I hope that my hon. Friends who have spoken against the Bills will not support the status quo. There is a blurred line between a pedlar and a trader. Two Acts of Parliament that were written a century apart are colliding in a major way, and people are taking advantage of it.
What is a pedlar? Trading by a person who is an authorised pedlar is exempt from the provisions of the 1982 Act. As other Members have said, however, to become a legitimate pedlar one simply has to gain a certificate issued by the police and keep on the move. The licence costs a mere £12.50, and can be applied for and gained anywhere in England, Wales or Northern Ireland. It can also be used anywhere in England, Wales or Northern Ireland, except in those areas where Acts similar to the Bills under consideration have been put into practice. That is a double standard, and that is why I plead with my hon. Friends and other Members not to preserve the status quo, which is unacceptable.
Manchester City Council Bill [Lords](By Order)
Proceeding contribution from
Tobias Ellwood
(Conservative)
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 c555-6 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:16:42 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481553
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481553
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_481553