I do not wish to delay proceedings, so I will be very brief. The Canterbury and Nottingham Bills were subject to extensive scrutiny by the House. A number of Members of this House used the parliamentary process very effectively indeed to challenge the need for the Bills and to question their content and their likely impact on pedlary and street trading. Similarly, the promoters put a great deal of time and effort into setting out to the House the need for the Bills. The Bills passed all their Commons stages, and it is surely only fair to allow them to complete their parliamentary process, bearing in mind that there are opportunities to subject them to further examination during their remaining stages—a point excellently made by my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham South (Lilian Greenwood).
The Minister is correct that this has been a lively debate, but I hope that we will be able to agree to the revival motion this evening. While I am on my feet, I would like also to thank the Minister for the comments that he made about the Government responding to the BIS consultation and publishing the outcome. I hope—I would like to press him on this point—that that will be a precursor to proposals for a national framework in due course.
Canterbury City Council Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Roberta Blackman-Woods
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 5 July 2010.
It occurred during Legislative debate on Canterbury City Council Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
513 c136 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 17:06:22 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_652007
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_652007
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_652007