Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Philip Davies (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 28 January 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on Leeds City Council Bill.


Leeds City Council Bill

I accept what my hon. Friend says, but we might be in the ridiculous situation—I will happily give way to him if he can convince me otherwise—whereby a secondary market for tickets to the Reading festival, which is of interest to people across the country and perhaps even internationally, is available to people everywhere, including on the internet, except Reading. It seems perverse that the Bill's promoter should want to deny choice to the people of Reading, while allowing people in the rest of the country, and perhaps further afield, the opportunity to exercise such choice. Why should a Bill that is supposed to deal with peddling affect the legitimate secondary market, which works in the best interest of the consumer? I accept the advice of my hon. Friend that such matters should not be delayed unnecessarily. I hope that the grave concerns that I have raised will be addressed in the other place, because the Bills will be better for the cities and towns concerned if such points are taken heed of. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for extracting the concessions that he has, but I wish that he had managed to extract further concessions.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
504 c993 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Licensing Leeds Reading Borough Council Reading (Berkshire) Touting Street trading Leeds City Council
Legislation
Leeds City Council Bill 2007-08 to 2012-13
Reading Borough Council Bill 2007-08 to 2012-13
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk