Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Christopher Chope (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 21 April 2009. It occurred during Legislative debate on Manchester City Council Bill [Lords] and Bournemouth Borough Council Bill [Lords].


Manchester City Council Bill [Lords] and Bournemouth Borough Council Bill [Lords]

As ever, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am grateful for your guidance. Let me respond to the intervention from the hon. Member for Reading, West (Martin Salter) by saying that I am sure we shall have a chance to discuss the issue in relation to Reading, but also—I think that I should put this on record—that I do not think I said that Reading borough council was keen to withdraw the Bill. I suggested that it was keen to amend significantly clause 5, which relates to pedlars. Perhaps we shall be able to discuss that later in tonight's proceedings. You referred to the Durham report, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I have argued that it constitutes new information. Prompted by my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Philip Davies), I have also referred to the Minister's written response to the report, which I think also introduces new information and which, in my view, presents a compelling reason for the House not to exercise its discretion and allow these Bills to be revived.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
491 c179 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Costs Direct selling Bournemouth Licensing Greater Manchester Local government Manchester City Council Street trading Bournemouth Borough Council
Legislation
Bournemouth Borough Council Bill (HL) 2006-07 to 2009-10
Manchester City Council Bill (HL) 2006-07 to 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk