Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Philip Davies (Conservative) 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

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. This is another unfair element of the Bill. Of course, if someone reserves the right not to pay the fixed penalty notice, they would presumably find themselves in court and it would be for the court to decide whether or not they should have to pay. I am sure my hon. Friend would agree that that creates a big financial risk for the pedlar concerned, who has to take a gamble—it could be quite a costly gamble in many cases—where he feels that he has done nothing wrong yet has been served with this fixed penalty notice. I suspect that in many cases even people who feel that they have been badly done by would feel obliged to pay the fixed penalty notice because of fear about a much bigger penalty further down the line. My hon. Friend is absolutely right that these notices could be given out in a far too willy-nilly way for my liking. This legislation, which we are on the verge of passing today, will allow the authorities to hand out these fixed penalty notices willy-nilly—in a way that I think most people would consider unreasonable.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
503 c928-9 
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