Proceeding contribution from Baroness Hanham (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 15 October 2007. It occurred during Debate on bill on Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill.
Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill
My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for that reply and for drawing attention to the amount of work that licensing committees have done. They are probably not as pressed now as they were when the Act first came in. My husband was a member of such a committee and I know how much work he did when dealing with all the licensing applications. The people on those committees will welcome the noble Baroness’s comments on that. Perhaps I may argue further about enabling the authority as a whole to be, in effect, the main licensing committee. There is nothing to stop 50 or 60 people being members of a committee—receiving training and being the committee. If that were available in legislation and could be adopted if a local authority wanted to, normal rules would apply for the main licensing committee as it stood. The members would have to undergo the same training and they would have to ensure that they were able and qualified to sit on a sub-committee. That would have to be a sine qua non of extending the licensing committee to take in all the members of an authority. I do not totally accept the noble Baroness’s argument, but I can see that she is not likely to shift very much and I shall take that into account. I recognise that the position of parish councils and communities has changed, but it has happened in a way that people are not totally happy with. However, I accept that the situation is not as it was originally, and I hope that in time the issue will become clearer. With regard to applying for a review of the other people who can take part, councillors always expect to be able to make representations about anything in their area, regardless of whether the council is running it. In their representative role, they have always expected to be able to take part in licensing legislation and are all rather miffed at not being able to put forward their views, particularly if they happen to know something about a situation that residents’ representatives do not know or have not asked them to put forward. I can see that it is very nice to be asked; equally, it is very nice to be able to contribute. I shall not push the amendment further. I thank the noble Baroness for her reply and beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 695 c619-20
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Codes of practice Administration Civic dignitaries Employment Health services Licensing Judiciary Health authorities Licensed premises Local government Patients Qualifications Public appointments Property Publicity Primary care trusts Public participation Staff Parish and town councils Local government executive Social security benefits Valuation Valuation Tribunal Service Cinque ports
- Legislation
- Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill 2006-07
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 11:38:08 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_417075
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_417075
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_417075