Proceeding contribution from Sammy Wilson (Democratic Unionist Party) 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 point has been made, and I accept it. However, it is not just the last landlord—others have contributed to the individual’s drunkenness. Disorderly behaviour does not require a person to be totally drunk—sometimes their inhibitions are lowered simply by the consumption of some alcohol. It would be difficult to establish a cut-off point—to determine the point at which the person became drunk and hold only the one landlord responsible. I seek some assurances from the Minister because I believe that there should be some differentiation. I shall listen carefully to her reply.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 439 c763-4
- 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 22:15:17 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_274450
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_274450
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_274450