Proceeding contribution from Martin Horwood (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 14 January 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on Canterbury City Council Bill.
Canterbury City Council Bill
The hon. Gentleman no doubt makes an important point about the national context, but I seem to remember him in another context arguing that larger geographical entities should not take powers that can properly be exercised by smaller ones. This seems a good opportunity to follow that argument. This genuine policy was agreed by Nottingham city council in 2007. It thinks that there is a problem. It does not think that the Bill is designed to stop normal street peddling. Should we not just let the policy be changed and not prolong the agony?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 503 c918
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Direct selling Canterbury City Council Licensing Local government Nottingham Nottingham City Council Touting Street trading Canterbury
- Legislation
- Canterbury City Council Bill 2007-08 to 2012-13
- Nottingham City Council Bill 2007-08 to 2012-13
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-11 10:04:52 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_609412
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_609412
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_609412