Mr. MunroI beg to move Amendment No. 22, in page 13, line 19, after 'hours', insert
'or any objector who is a licence-holder'.I am a little disappointed that there is no Government amendment put down to this clause. I appreciate that the Minister did not give any commitment in the assurances he gave to look at this matter again, but we feel strongly about canvassing by objectors. We agree that there should be no canvassing by applicants for licences, but we also feel that objectors should be in the same position.5.15 a.m.
The Minister said that an applicant had a financial interest and that an objector had an environmental interest, and that he could see a subtle distinction between the two. Objectors could object on financial grounds because their business or interest was affected. The Minister should have given way on this issue after having considered it. If he is not prepared to accept the amendment, he should at least look at it once more and talk to his colleagues in the other place about the possibility of moving a similar amendment later. There is a strong case for putting objectors to an application in exactly the same position as applicants.
§ Mr. Harry EwingWe gave serious consideration to this matter and came to the conclusion that it would be wrong to single out one class of objector—namely, licence-holders—for prosecution for canvassing. Although we have sympathy with the argument, on balance we feel that it would be wrong to isolate a licence-holder by charging him with the offence. If a licence-holder were found to be canvassing against the application of another licence-holder, the suitability of that person to hold a licence under Clause 18 would be for the board to decide. For those balanced reasons, we ask that the amendment be withdrawn.
Mr. MunroI note what the Minister has said. I cannot say that I agree with him, but in the circumstances I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.