HL Deb 19 March 1997 vol 579 cc993-1006

7.50 p.m.

Report received.

Clause 1 [Licensing outside Greater London]:

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 1: Page 1, line 16, leave out ("or near the place") and insert ("the place or at any place nearby which is controlled by the holder of the licence").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12 and 13. I see from the grouping that Amendment No. 14 in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, is included.

The amendments return the House to the topic which was raised at previous stages of the Bill; that is, whether the licence holder should be vulnerable to the loss of his licence if the drug misuse is going on at a place near the licensed premises, over which he has no control. I, and several other noble Lords, have already expressed the view that that should not be the position. The licence holder should be vulnerable to the drastic provisions of the Bill only in respect of premises over which he has some control.

The arguments have been fully rehearsed at all previous stages of the Bill. The problem, in part at least, is the lack of definition of the expression "near the place" within the Bill as it is presently drafted. There is a vagueness about it which means that, in theory at least, the licence holder could be held responsible for a car park or something similar some distance away from his licensed premises.

More fundamentally, as presently drafted, the Bill would make the licence holder vulnerable to the misuse of premises over which he has no responsibility whatsoever. It is wrong that someone should lose his licence and his livelihood, and the livelihood of a considerable number of employees, if premises over which he has no power or authority are being used, and he can do nothing about it. Even if the licence holder himself is acting responsibly, and taking all possible precautions at the premises—in other words, it may well be that the licence holder is doing his best, or can be made to do his best, to put in place proper security at the door and proper surveillance within the licensed premises—he may still be vulnerable to the Bill's drastic provisions.

It has to be remembered that the Bill is drastic. It provides for the closing down of clubs. It must be remembered that in some of these situations closing the club will not necessarily deal with the drug pushers. It will merely transfer the problem elsewhere. If the problem is outside the control of the club owner, he should not be vulnerable, and so I propose the amendment. If there is a problem nearby over which the licence holder has realistically no control whatsoever, it is not for him to deal with it; it is for the police to deal with it, and the police can deal with it under their existing powers. I beg to move.

Viscount Ullswater

My Lords, before I address the amendment, I make the declaration of interest, as I have on previous occasions, as I am a director of Rank Leisure Limited. At previous stages of the Bill, it has been made clear that without an amendment such as the one just moved by the noble Lord, Lord Meston, there would be a serious risk that the requirements of natural justice might not have been met. I hope that my noble friend Lady Anelay of St Johns will look kindly upon this series of amendments. I am glad to say that she nods her head, so that is good news.

In Committee, the noble Lord, Lord Harris of Greenwich, stressed how a wide interpretation of the phrase "or near" could destroy someone's business, possibly even a small business, on the basis of a police report. I have to agree with that. That is the concern which has worried the Committee and now worries the House.

The amendment affords some protection to the licence holder with a well-run club from losing his public entertainments licence through no fault of his own. That is the crux of the matter. I am grateful to my noble friend Lady Anelay, because she has been most anxious to see that this small piece of legislation can be properly interpreted by local authorities in an even-handed way across the country. The amendment she moved in Committee, and will move on Report, has gone a long way towards assisting that. I support the amendment.

Lord Gladwin of Clee

My Lords, in Committee I spoke against an amendment which was designed to remove the words "or near the place", and was chastised by the noble Lord, Lord Harris of Greenwich, for so doing. I still hold the view that I expressed then. I believe that the amendment weakens the Bill considerably. We shall still have problems with drug dealing in places nearby, in areas adjacent to discos, nightclubs, or raves which are not under the control of the licence holder.

I gave the example before of problems in car parks owned by local authorities and car parks which are privately owned. We know that goes on. Drug dealing goes on in those car parks because of the nearby place of entertainment that has been licensed. However, the police will have to deal with that problem. I repeat that I believe the amendment considerably weakens the Bill, but in the interests of getting the Bill on to the statute book I reluctantly acquiesce.

Baroness Masham of Ilton

My Lords, perhaps I may ask a question relating to the car parks. I was under the impression that if the car park belonged to the club it would be covered. I support the amendments because the insurance for a member of staff who might be beaten up at a bus stop might be complicated. Who would be responsible for that member of staff's insurance if they were off the premises? Therefore I believe that the amendments are an advantage.

Lord Harris of Greenwich

My Lords, I shall be brief, because I know that others want to move on to other business. I am glad that we have managed to reach an agreement with the noble Baroness. My noble friend and I had the opportunity to discuss this issue with her, and with the Bill's sponsor from the other place. I believe that she will indicate her support for the amendments.

The noble Baroness, Lady Masham, is right. If the car park is owned or controlled by the licence holder, he can be caught by the Bill. So that deals with the problem. If it is a municipal car park, he would not be. As a matter of common sense, he should not be. Because how can the proprietor of a club protect himself from the activities of drugs dealers in a car park which he neither manages nor controls? It would be most unjust—to put it mildly—for there to be such an outcome. I very much agree with the noble Viscount: I believe that the amendments substantially improve the Bill. I and my noble friend believe that they remove many of the anxieties that we expressed on a previous occasion.

8 p.m.

Lord Monson

My Lords, I am glad to support these important amendments which were explained so well by the noble Lord, Lord Meston. They echo amendments similar to those which I backed previously and which accord with natural justice, as pointed out by the noble Viscount, Lord Ullswater. I very much hope that they will be accepted.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

My Lords, I recognise that for some noble Lords the concept in the Bill as it stands of "near the place" and how that might be defined by local authorities has caused some difficulty. I am also aware of the concern expressed by some noble Lords that innocent club owners will be penalised for problems that occur in locations not directly under their control.

I understand those concerns, but I believe that tonight we must remind ourselves of the nature and scale of the problem that we are seeking to address. Drugs are posing a threat to the lives and well-being of a whole generation of young people. It is our young people who are being targeted by the drug dealers. Like it or not, clubs and similar venues where youngsters go to enjoy themselves act as a magnet for the drug dealers. Let us not delude ourselves about the grim consequences of a club becoming a focus for drugs.

Recently, a Channel 4 programme in the "Dispatches" series set out graphically how a club in Basildon, where corrupt door staff were actively managing drug dealing on the premises, seemingly without any intervention by the management became a central feature of a drugs and crime wave in the town. That was the club where the ecstasy which killed Leah Betts was purchased.

Local authorities need to have tough powers to deal with problems when they reach such proportions. I hear what the noble Lord, Lord Gladwin of Clee, says tonight and I understand his comments with regard to these amendments. I sympathise with the principles behind his comments, but I appreciate that I must be realistic. I accept the amendments as the way forward for this Bill. However, I feel sure that both noble Lords whose names were put to the amendments will join me in recognising that the club trade has responsibility to play its part in society's struggle against illegal drugs and the criminals who peddle them. I hope that the Home Office, in the consultations due to take place on the draft guidance on the new powers, will encourage further co-operation between the club owners, the police and the local authorities to deal with the drug problems on club premises and wherever else club staff observe such problems occurring.

Earlier, the noble Lord, Lord Meston, referred to the fact that I shall speak also to Amendment No. 14. It does no more than Amendment No. 12 in the names of the noble Lords, Lord Meston and Lord Harris of Greenwich. It clarifies in respect of the powers of the court to revoke a licence that "premises" and "place" have the same meaning in both Acts with which we are concerned; namely, the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 and the London Government Act 1963.

The Earl of Courtown

My Lords, I agree entirely with the sentiments expressed by my noble friend. The serious problem that drug misuse poses to young people is there for all to see. The Government want to see this Bill make progress and hope that these amendments will be accepted by the House.

Lord Meston

My Lords, I am grateful to all noble Lords who have spoken. I understand the point of view of the noble Lord, Lord Gladwin of Clee, and the point that such clubs are magnetic to drug pushers. The fact is that clubs are responsible for what goes on there and what goes into them through the front door. It is the responsibility of clubs to protect their customers from drug dealers at those points. However, they cannot be responsible for what goes on in areas outside the clubs over which they have no control. That is the responsibility of the police. It is not an answer simply to move the problem elsewhere by closing the club. I am grateful for the support and I commend the amendment to the House.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns moved Amendment No. 2: Page 2, line 8, at end insert— ("(6) The authority shall have regard in exercising their functions under this paragraph to such guidance as may be issued by the Secretary of State."").

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 4, 8 and 11. We have discussed the status and content of the circular that is to be issued before these new powers come into effect. We have seen an early draft of the guidance and we have been given assurances that the key players involved—namely, the local authorities, the police and the club trade—will be consulted on the contents of the final version to be published before the new powers come into effect.

I hold firmly to the view that the circular should not be prescriptive. It should not be binding on local authorities because that would merely stifle the co-operation and development of local solutions to local problems, which must be the best way forward. However, I see merit in providing a marker in the Bill of advice that is available, particularly for those local authorities which have infrequent dealing with the club scene and in requiring the local authorities to have regard to it. I beg to move.

Viscount Ullswater

My Lords, I thank my noble friend for introducing the amendment. In Committee, a great deal of attention was paid to the draft circular of guidance notes. Since then, matters have changed and they are already out of date. Of course, they will be further out of date after the passing of amendments here tonight.

However, I believe that without the amendment the guidance notes would have no status. As the noble Lord, Lord Meston, said in Committee, they do not even have the statutory status of the Highway Code. They should be given greater status on the face of the Bill.

The amendment recognises the fears expressed by many noble Lords and I am grateful to my noble friend for introducing it tonight. In Committee, I spent some time indicating how the guidance notes deal with the police report and the hearings, and how that will improve the consistent way in which local authorities should apply this legislation. I do not intend to repeat what I said at this late hour, but I would make one point. Perhaps the most important step is that the Home Office should undertake a further consultation process with the local authority associations, the Association of Chief Police Officers and representatives of the club trade so that the guidance note can be tightened up. That was recognised all around the Committee. Whether they should become more prescriptive can be dealt with in those consultations and I do not seek to comment on that now.

The British Entertainment and Discotheque Association, BEDA, has communicated its continued worries to me about the draft circular. Now is the time to address those worries and perhaps I may ask my noble friend Lord Courtown to assure the House that BEDA'sviews, among others, will he seriously considered now that so many amendments have been made to the Bill in further consultation.

Lord Harris of Greenwich

My Lords, I echo what was said by the noble Viscount. I agree with him entirely. The measure is appropriate and I hope that the Minister will agree that the trade and all the other interests concerned should be consulted before the circular is issued, particularly in the light of the amendments that have been agreed.

Lord Meston

My Lords, I, too, am grateful for the amendment. Guidance is genuinely needed. I wish to say more on the extent to which it is to be prescriptive in relation to Amendment No. 16.

I wish to emphasise the point that consultation is important. If I have learnt nothing else about the club trade as a result of this Bill, I have learnt that there is an extraordinarily large number of different trade organisations and associations, all with bewildering acronyms. I have no doubt that they would all wish to be consulted and quite properly they ought to be.

The Earl of Courtown

My Lords, I assure all noble Lords who have raised the matter that the Government have given an undertaking to consult interested parties such as BEDA, the local authorities and other trade associations on the terms of the guidance to be issued in connection with those new powers. The final version of the circular will be issued before the new powers come into effect. Therefore, consultation will take place on the Bill as amended.

The Government fully support the noble Baroness's amendment and hope that it will be accepted by the House.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 3: Page 2, line 14, leave out ("or near the place") and insert ("the place or at any place nearby which is controlled by the holder of the licence").

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns moved Amendment No. 4: Page 2, line 33, at end insert— ("(5) The authority shall have regard in exercising their functions under this paragraph to such guidance as may be issued by the Secretary of State.").

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 5: Page 2, line 39, leave out ("or near the place") and insert ("the place or at any place nearby which is controlled by the holder of the licence").

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 6: Page 3, line 19, at end insert— ("(7B) An authority which refuses to renew or revokes a licence under paragraph 6A or 11A above may order that the licence shall remain in force (subject to such terms, conditions and restrictions as may be imposed)—

  1. (a) until the time for bringing an appeal against the refusal to renew or revocation has expired; and
  2. (b) if such an appeal is duly brought, until the determination or abandonment of the appeal,
and if such an order is made any special hours certificate granted under section 77 of the Licensing Act 1964 shall also remain in force for the same period.").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, this amendment replicates an amendment which I moved in Committee to draw attention to what appeared to be an anomaly on the face of the Bill which was explained by the noble Earl, Lord Courtown, on Second Reading; namely, if the court revokes a licence, it has power to direct that a licence may remain in force pending appeal but a local authority, licensing authority or council does not have that same power. For that reason, I return to the matter now.

It is an anomaly. The noble Earl was kind enough to write to me on the subject and explain that the difference is that the courts are not empowered to impose or vary conditions of the licence in the same way as a licensing authority is empowered to do under the provisions of the Bill.

I understand that that difference exists, but I wonder whether it is a difference sufficient to justify that anomaly. For that reason, I bring the matter back and I beg to move.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

My Lords, I know that the noble Lord, Lord Meston, finds it anomalous that the courts have the power to order that a club can stay open pending an appeal while local authorities are not similarly empowered. In fact, that power has been given to the courts to give them a degree of compatibility with the options already available to local authorities.

By now noble Lords will be familiar with the courses of action open to local authorities proposed in this Bill. First, the local authority has to apply the two-stage test of establishing that there is a serious drugs problem; and then, whether action by the authority will assist significantly in dealing with the problem.

After due consideration, a local authority may then decide that neither of the tests is satisfied and so take no further action. But at the other end of the scale, the local authority may decide that the nature and seriousness of the problem is such that the licence should be revoked. The licence holder then has established avenues of appeal to the courts which this Bill does not disturb in any way.

However, a local authority can opt to take a middle course. It might decide, perhaps on the basis of the representations made by the licence holder, that the drug problem can be addressed properly by, for example, changes in the management of the door staff or by the adoption of other security measures. In such cases, it may be sufficient simply to impose new terms or to vary existing conditions of the licence in order to assist significantly in dealing with the problem.

The courts are not empowered to impose or vary licence conditions in that way. Therefore, bearing in mind the sort of circumstances to which I referred earlier where a local authority might impose or vary conditions, I believe that it is right that the courts should be able to order that a licence should remain in force pending appeal.

Tacking on a further stage in a local authority's consideration of a case is unnecessary. I remain convinced that local authorities are more than capable of reaching a decision in the light of all the evidence and/or the options open to them at that stage. I hope that in the circumstances, the noble Lord will agree to withdraw his amendment.

The Earl of Courtown

My Lords, when this amendment was debated in Committee, the noble Lords, Lord Meston and Lord Monson. queried why the Bill did not give local authorities the same powers as it gives to the courts; namely, to order that a licence should remain in force after revocation pending appeal.

At the time I undertook to write to the noble Lord setting out the position, which I have done. As my noble friend Lady Anelay said, the options available to a local authority, after hearing all the evidence of a serious problem concerning drugs, are that it may take no action, impose terms and conditions or revoke the licence where doing so would assist in dealing with the problem.

The courts are not so empowered and for that reason a provision has been included in the Bill to enable them to grant a stay in revoking the licence until the time for bringing an appeal against revocation has expired or until an appeal has been determined or abandoned.

I agree with my noble friend that granting a similar power to local authorities is unnecessary. In any event, the issues surrounding the revocation are addressed in the first draft of the Home Office circular. The seriousness of the consequences of non-renewal or revocation—that the licensees will not be able to operate the club pending the hearing of any appeal—are referred to in the circular. No doubt the advice in the circular on that and other issues will be refined further in the course of the consultation process which we have agreed to undertake. I hope that the noble Lord will not press the amendment.

Lord Meston

My Lords, I am grateful for the explanation both from the noble Baroness and the Minister. It seems to me that that makes it all the more important that the guidance should provide for a sufficient hearing before the licensing committee which enables the licence holder to state his case fully and properly.

However, I accept the further point made by the noble Baroness that under the machinery of the Bill as it now remains, there is the further stage of ability to make representations after the event which, in a sense, is a form of appeal. For that reason, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 2 [Licensing in Greater London]:

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 7: Page 3, line 34, leave out ("or near the premises") and insert ("the premises or at any premises nearby which are controlled by the holder of the licence").

On Question, amendment agreed to.

8.15 p.m.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns moved Amendment No. 8: Page 4, line 8, at end insert— ("(6) The Council shall have regard in exercising their functions under this paragraph to such guidance as may be issued by the Secretary of State.'").

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendments Nos. 9 and 10: Page 4, line 8, at end insert— ("() In this paragraph "premises" includes any place.""). Page 4, line 14, leave out ("or near the premises") and insert ("the premises or at any premises nearby which are controlled by the holder of the licence").

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns moved Amendment No. 11: Page 4, line 33, at end insert— ("(5) The Council shall have regard in exercising their functions under this paragraph to such guidance as may be issued by the Secretary of State.").

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendments Nos. 12 and 13: Page 4, line 33, at end insert— ("() In this paragraph "premises" includes any place."). Page 4, line 40, leave out ("or near the premises") and insert ("the premises or at any premises nearby which are controlled by the holder of the licence").

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns moved Amendment No. 14: Page 4, leave out lines 43 and 44 and insert— ("(4B) The standard of proof for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4A) of this paragraph is that applicable in civil proceedings and in that sub-paragraph "premises" includes any place.").

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendment No. 15 not moved.]

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 16: Before Clause 3, insert the following new clause—

GUIDANCE BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE

(" . The Secretary of State may issue guidance providing (among other matters)—

  1. (a) that, except in an emergency, the licensing authority or Council shall not revoke or refuse to renew or transfer a licence or impose terms, conditions or restrictions thereon unless satisfied that the owners or managers of the place have been informed by the police of their concerns about the supply or use of controlled drugs at or near the place and have had a reasonable opportunity to meet those concerns;
  2. (b) that any report by the police to the licensing authority or Council shall summarise previous exchanges between the police and the licence holder, owners or managers of the place about their concerns about the supply or use of controlled drugs at or near the place;
  3. (c) that, except in an emergency, the licensing authority or Council shall not revoke or refuse to renew or transfer a licence or impose terms, conditions or restrictions thereon without first affording the licence holder an opportunity of being heard by the authority or Council and of making representations to them;
  4. (d) that, in considering whether action by the licensing authority or Committee will significantly assist in dealing with a serious problem relating to the supply or use of controlled drugs near the place, the authority or Council shall also consider what control the licence holder, owners or managers have over any place outside the licensed premises, what security and surveillance measures are, or will be in force at the licensed premises and what other powers the police could exercise apart from under this Act; and
  5. (e) explanations of what may constitute a "serious problem" and of what is meant by "will significantly assist in dealing with the problem.").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, we have progressed considerably with this Bill in that on the face of the Bill there is provision for there to be guidance and I suggest that that is a considerable improvement. But it must be remembered that guidance is only guidance and we are legislating in a field in which at present, there are no uniform procedures as between different licensing authorities. For that reason, I suggest in this amendment that certain minimum provisions should appear in the guidance and I have set those out in the amendment.

Those provisions are familiar topics in the context of the discussions that we have had while the Bill has passed through your Lordships' House. First, "except in an emergency", a licence should not be revoked or terms be imposed unless the police have informed the owners or managers of the place of their concerns and those people have had a reasonable opportunity to meet such concerns. Secondly, the amendment provides that any report by the police should summarise previous exchanges between the police and the licence holders, and others. I have shamelessly lifted that from the first draft of the guidance. I hope, therefore, that it will not be controversial.

Thirdly, the amendment provides that, except in an emergency, the licensing authority should not exercise its powers to revoke, and so on, without giving the licence holder the opportunity to be heard and to make representations. The fourth provision which I seek to introduce is, I suspect, now otiose, because it is covered by the amendments which have already been accepted relating to the removal of the expression "near the place". Nevertheless, I hope that the point that I am trying to make is a good one; namely, that if the operation of the Bill is to be fair, and is seen to be fair to all concerned, there ought to be some minimum provision to ensure fair procedures on the face of the Bill, and provided for within the guidance. At the very least, I hope that the Government can give an assurance that all of these matters will be adequately covered within the guidance. I beg to move.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

My Lords, a clear undertaking has been given to produce a circular in consultation with local authorities, the police and the club trade with advice on all the issues covered by the amendments. There is a first draft which the Home Office will use as the basis for the consultation process. I am sure that the points raised during our debates in this House will be taken into account at that stage.

The guidance in the circular cannot, and I believe should not, he prescriptive. It is designed to extend and develop the many examples across England and Wales where the police, local authorities and club owners are already working together and where local procedures have been devised to counter the threat posed locally by drugs. I do not believe that we should include such detail on the face of the Bill. It would complicate the issue and could hamper the very process of developing the co-operation and flexibility for which we should be looking. In the circumstances, I hope that the noble Lord will agree to withdraw the amendment.

The Earl of Courtown

My Lords, I agree with the point made by my noble friend. As I said earlier, the Government have given a clear undertaking to consult all interested parties on the circular. All the issues covered by the amendments will be addressed in the guidance. Given those assurances, I hope that the noble Lord will agree not to press his amendment.

Lord Meston

My Lords, I am both reassured and grateful. I have qualified most of the provisions within the amendment with the expression, "except in an emergency". The only point that I should like to add is that I hope the guidance will recognise that there must be very few emergencies so great as to preclude some warning to the licence holder of the concerns of the police and some warning, even if it is a matter of a few minutes or a few hours, of the imminent meeting of the relevant licensing authority. As I said, I am reassured, and on that basis I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 3 [Consequential provision for special hours certificates]:

Baroness Anelay of St Johns moved Amendment No. 17: Page 5, line 37, leave out from ("of') to second ("reinstated") in line 42 and insert ("—

  1. (a) an application for the renewal of a licence being refused under paragraph 6A(2) of Schedule 1 to the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 or 1004 paragraph 2A(2) of Schedule 12 to the London Government Act 1963, or
  2. (b) a licence being revoked under paragraph 11 A(2) or 12(5) of Schedule 1 or paragraph 9A(2) or 10(4A) of Schedule 12,
the certificate shall be reinstated if the licence is subsequently renewed under paragraph 17 of Schedule 1 or paragraph 19 of Schedule 12 or if the licence is subsequently").

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I recognise that we need to look again at the provisions for safeguarding the special hours certificates in the event of a local authority accepting representations against revocation or a successful appeal in the courts. I suggest that my amendment now covers both those eventualities. However, I am not sure that the amendment tabled in the name of the noble Lord would quite fulfil that purpose. I also question whether the reference in that amendment to the circumstance of a licence transfer is appropriate as refusal to transfer an entertainments licence does not in itself mean that the licence comes to an end. In those circumstances, I hope that the noble Lord will accept that my amendment deals adequately with the issue and that he will agree not to press his amendment. I beg to move.

Lord Meston

My Lords, I can assure the House that drafting Amendment No. 18 was a painful process. However, I am quite prepared to accept that Amendment No. 17 is much better.

The Earl of Courtown

My Lords, further consideration has been given to ensure that club owners whose representations or appeals are successful would not be disadvantaged if they then had to wait while their application for a special hours certificate was being processed. My noble friend's amendment gives further safeguards and is supported by the Government.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendment No. 18 not moved.]

Clause 4 [Short title, commencement and extent]:

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 19: Page 6, line 4, after ("appoint") insert ("after the issue by the Secretary of State of guidance under sections (Guidance by the Secretary of State").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, the amendment simply seeks to provide that the legislation shall not come into force until the issue by the Secretary of State of the guidance which has already been provided for within the body of the Bill as it now stands amended. I hope that it is consistent with an indication given at an earlier stage by the Government. On that basis, I beg to move.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

My Lords, my comments on this amendment refer back to what I said when responding to Amendment No. 16. For the reasons that I expressed then, I hope that the noble Lord will see fit to withdraw the amendment.

The Earl of Courtown

My Lords, I concur with my noble friend. I also spoke to the amendment when responding to Amendment No. 16.

Lord Meston

My Lords, I am, therefore, hopeful that the spirit of the amendment will be observed. On that understanding, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Then, Standing Order No. 44 having been suspended (pursuant to Resolution of 18th March), Bill read a third time.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill do now pass.

Given the amount of business yet to pass through this House tonight, I hope that noble Lords will understand if I cut short the usual courtesies in expressing my thanks to all noble Lords who have taken part in the proceedings on the Bill from Second Reading onwards. I am most grateful to all those who have underlined their commitment to the principles behind the legislation.

Moved, That the Bill do now pass.—(Baroness Anelay of St Johns.)

Baroness Masham of Ilton

My Lords, I should like to congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay of St Johns, for the sterling work that she has undertaken during the passage of the Bill in your Lordships' House. There have been some concessions to the Bill, so I hope that the public entertainment industry will do all that it can to eliminate drug use at premises where many young people go to enjoy themselves.

As I said at Second Reading, I hope that the health and safety regulations will be put in place as soon as possible. That should be done before the hot summer. It should not be too difficult as Scotland already has them. It really is inhuman to turn off the water so that desperately thirsty young people who have been dancing for long periods are forced to buy expensive bottles of drink. The country was alerted to the very difficult problems of the drug culture by the Daily Express campaign last week. I hope this Bill will send a positive message to clubs and local authorities that they have to take this matter seriously.

Lord Gladwin of Clee

My Lords, I wish briefly from these Benches to congratulate my noble friend—I must be careful about this—Lady Anelay of St Johns—on carrying through this Bill which I think has been described as a small Bill. However, it is an important weapon in the fight against drugs dealing and drugs misuse in this country. I warmly congratulate the noble Baroness on the work that she has done. I also thank the noble Earl, Lord Courtown, for his co-operation and help as this Bill has proceeded.

Lord Meston

My Lords, I, too, warmly congratulate the noble Baroness on her conduct of this Bill through your Lordships' House. It was important that this Bill had some scrutiny in your Lordships' House, particularly as it received only a Second Reading in another place. That has enabled us to look at this Bill and to improve it somewhat. It is perhaps fortunate that most of the improvements were foreshadowed by debates which we were able to have at a more leisurely pace than during the accelerated procedures of recent days. I thank the noble Baroness and the Minister for their responsiveness to the suggestions which have been made at various stages. I certainly hope that this Bill achieves all that it sets out to achieve.

The Earl of Courtown

My Lords, I shall speak briefly. I can probably agree with everything that has been said, in particular as regards my admiration for my noble friend and the way she has handled the Bill. It has not been an easy process. When I came to this House I presented a Private Member's Bill before I joined the Front Bench. The noble Lord, Lord Meston, smiles. That Bill was debated and it went to Committee stage. As the noble Lord, Lord Gladwin, has said, this Bill is an important weapon and we wish it well.

On Question, Bill passed, and returned to the Commons with amendments.