HL Deb 18 November 1964 vol 261 cc574-5

2.58 p.m.

LORD REA

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will give consideration to the position of street traders who are unable to obtain a street trading licence and whose only practical means of meeting fines which may be imposed upon them for illegal street trading is to repeat their offence, thus bringing the law into disrepute.]

THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE, HOME OFFICE (LORD STONHAM)

My Lords, street trading in London is regulated under Part TV of the London County Council (General Powers) Act, 1947, which provides for the designation, by borough councils, of streets for street trading purposes and for the licensing of persons to trade from sites in those streets. It is an offence to trade in a designated street without a licence or to trade in any other street from a stationary position. A borough council is required to consider the designation of further streets, or parts of streets, for street trading purposes, on the application of ten or more persons trading, or residing, within the borough. If an application is refused by the council there is a right of appeal to my right honourable friend the Home Secretary.

These arrangements, which allow for an increase in street trading facilities when they are found to be necessary and practicable, would appear sufficient to meet the legitimate needs of both traders and the public, but I shall be very ready to consider any proposals which the noble Lord may wish to make. Over most of England and Wales, it is not an offence to trade in the streets without a licence.

LORD REA

My Lords, I am very grateful to the Minister for that reply, which I might perhaps describe as an explanatory reply. May I say that the object of this Question was not to accuse or point a questioning finger at either the street traders or authorities concerned, but to ask Her Majesty's Government whether they could possibly indicate some way out of this dilemma, which bears hardly on both parties. For my part I have no solution ready to make, and what I was asking the noble Lord was whether Her Majesty's Government could suggest some way out of this difficulty.

LORD STONHAM

I had hoped that the Answer I gave showed that there was in fact no real dilemma. An unlicensed person can trade in the streets provided he keeps moving. It is difficult, I understand, but it is done. It may well be that greater difficulties have arisen in London recently because certain streets have been closed to the perambulating street traders since parking meters have been installed. But they can still go to other streets and carry on business. We could not accept the view implied by the noble Lord's Question, that, for example, if a burglar were fined he would have to burgle again to pay the fine.

LORD REA

Is not that exactly the position that exists to-day?

LORD STONHAM

I am suggesting we cannot possibly accept that proposition. Otherwise it would mean that a vendor of carpets, for example, could "plonk" himself down with immunity hi the centre of Oxford Street. We have to draw the line between freedom and anarchy, and I say the present regulations have succeeded.

LORD REA

I accept the difficulty, but I am still seeking a solution from Her Majesty's Government.

LORD STONHAM

Her Majesty's Government will be very glad to consider any suggestion the noble Lord may care to make.