Proceeding contribution from Baroness Featherstone (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Monday, 14 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Violent Crime Reduction Bill 2005-06.
Violent Crime Reduction Bill
That is not the case. We think that we have to tackle town centre disorder and believe in the ““polluter pays”” principle, but we want to make the legislation more workable because there might be the unintended consequence of small businesses going broke. Does the hon. Lady think that it would have been more convincing if the Government had widened the powers of local authorities to apply saturation policies and limit the number of establishments? She is right: most trouble is caused where many places are close together.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 439 c751
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Crime prevention Crime Alcoholic drinks Crimes of violence Anti-social behaviour Airguns Licensing Further education Imitation firearms Licensed premises Drunkenness Misuse Offensive weapons Sales Schools Young people Right of search Students Drinking banning orders Anti-social behaviour orders Alcohol disorder zones
- Legislation
- Violent Crime Reduction Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 22:15:33 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_274412
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_274412
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_274412