UK Parliament / Open data

Canterbury City Council Bill

Proceeding contribution from Philip Davies (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 14 January 2010. It occurred during Debate on bills on Canterbury City Council Bill.
I certainly agree with my hon. Friend on that point. Does he agree that, given that the consequences of seizure are dealt with in these Bills—there is a clause on the seizure of perishable items, for example—and that seized items have to be returned within 56 days, anybody who had had their goods taken off them unlawfully would have to go through the rigmarole and hassle of going to a county court to get some kind of compensation? Given the complications of people getting their goods back—if they get them back at all—and the processes they would have to go through to get any compensation, does my hon. Friend agree it is important that goods are not taken away from people willy-nilly at this stage?

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

503 c913 

Session

2009-10

Chamber / Committee

House of Commons chamber
Back to top