Second Reading Committee
Tuesday 7 March 2000
[Mr. Barry Jones in the Chair]
10.30 am
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Mr. Alan Howarth): I beg to move,
That, during proceedings on the Royal Parks (Trading) Bill, the Committee do meet on Tuesdays at half-past Ten o'clock and at half-past Four o'clock and on Thursdays at half-past Two o'clock.
I trust that the sittings motion is superfluous. I hope that we will speedily reach agreement on the principles of the Bill, if we have not already done so, and that we will complete Second Reading this morning. However, it is good for order and discipline that we have a sittings motion. I do not want to press the case for the motion, but I shall take the opportunity to say what a pleasure it is to proceed under your chairmanship, Mr. Jones, given your high reputation for scrupulous non-partisanship. Both of us, as hon. Members who represent Welsh constituencies, bring a suitable objectivity to the issues.
I particularly welcome the hon. Member for Ryedale (Mr. Greenway) to his responsibilities on the Conservative Front Bench for the fields of culture, media and sport. I look forward to debating with him, and I know that we will explore—possibly with a touch of contention between us—the best outcomes for the public interest.
I commend the sittings motion to the Committee.
10.31 am
Mr. John Greenway (Ryedale): I reiterate the comments of the Under-Secretary, the hon. Member for Newport, East (Mr. Howarth). It is a great pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mr. Jones. I state from personal experience that what the hon. Gentleman said about the independence and non-partisanship with which you chair proceedings is unerringly accurate. It is a pleasure to have you with us for what I, too, hope will be relatively speedy progress.
I am grateful to the Minister for his kind welcome. He will discover considerable unanimity today, not least in support of his wish that, despite the sittings motion, we should bring matters to a conclusion in the first sitting. However, I warn him that I am not sure whether such unanimity will continue when we debate other policy areas.
10.33 am
Mr. Robert Maclennan (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross): Having heard the tributes paid to you this morning, Mr. Jones, I must add my own thoughts. I was reminded of Goneril and Regan being invited by King Lear to give their views, and of the thoughts of the third daughter, Cordelia, which were:
Although she came to a sticky end, I will follow her example.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That, during proceedings on the Royal Parks (Trading) Bill, the Committee do meet on Tuesdays at half-past Ten o'clock and at half-past Four o'clock and on Thursdays at half-past Two o'clock.
Mr. Alan Howarth: I beg to move,
That the Chairman do now report to the House that the Committee recommends that the Royal Parks (Trading) Bill ought to be read a Second time.
Bill is modest in length and has the single purpose of dealing with illegal trading, and its accompanying problems, in the royal parks. It will give my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, and the Royal Parks Constabulary, powers to deal with illegal trading similar to those which Parliament has given to Westminster city council in the City of Westminster Act 1999.
The royal parks are one of the glories of London. They are enjoyed by millions of people each year—local people, visitors from all over the United Kingdom and visitors and tourists from abroad. They are justifiably renowned. Visitors rightly expect to enjoy the open air in peace. They expect the highest standards of cleanliness and presentation which the Royal Parks agency strives with impressive success to provide and maintain. Visitors have a right to feel confident that anything—especially refreshments—offered to them for sale in the royal parks will be of a high quality and at a reasonable cost.
It is the responsibility of the Government to ensure that services in the royal parks are safe and clean. It is a responsibility which we take very seriously. That is why anyone who sells goods in a royal park must obtain permission to do so from my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. Reputable firms are authorised to provide high quality refreshments in all the royal parks. They provide a valuable service to the public and part of their income goes towards the maintenance and upkeep of the royal parks.
Regulations may be made under the Parks Regulation (Amendment) Act 1926 to secure the proper management of the royal parks and to preserve order and prevent abuses in them. The only regulations that are currently in force under the 1926 Act are the Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces Regulations 1997, which include a requirement that anyone wishing to trade in one of the parks listed in those regulations must obtain the written permission of the Secretary of State. If a person fails to comply with or acts in contravention of the regulations, including that for trading within the parks, he commits an offence under the 1926 Act. At present the court may impose a fine of up to £200 after conviction for such an offence. That said, fines, however frequently imposed by the courts, do not, as things are, act as an effective deterrent when compared with the income that can be gained from illegal trading.
The Right hon. Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Mr. Brooke) and, I am sure, other hon. Members, know all too well what illegal trading means in practice. Between spring and autumn the central royal parks—particularly St. James's park—are plagued by individuals operating carts from which they sell hot dogs or ice-cream in what I would describe, with some understatement, as unhygienic conditions. The unpleasant odour betrays their presence in the park from some distance away.
These activities are taking place without permission. They are unregulated and uncontrolled. Exorbitant prices are often charged for food of dubious quality and freshness. Complaints by the public are often met with verbal abuse. These activities take place right up to the gates of Buckingham palace. They are a threat to the health of visitors, they tarnish—very visibly—the image of the royal parks, they undermine the legitimate business of authorised traders and they deprive the royal parks of much-needed income.
I am advised that interviews by the immigration and social security authorities have elicited that many of those operating these food carts say that they are asylum seekers. It is apparent that they are being exploited by others who keep what we understand to be very considerable profits. Observations by park constables indicate that strong-armed methods are used to protect the interests of those who control this illegal trade. A prime location is not to be surrendered easily to a competitor. Knives have been drawn on occasions by rival operators. Royal parks constables have been attacked when they have tried to move the illegal traders out of a park.
We are not seeking in this Bill to introduce gratuitous bureaucratic control or a burden of unnecessary regulation on legitimate businesses and entrepreneurial enterprise; quite the opposite. We are seeking to protect the health and the pocket of the public, the pleasant surroundings of the royal parks and the interests of the authorised traders whose business and income are being undermined by illegal trading. We are seeking to provide effective means to deal with criminal activity.
The whole problem is not new but has worsened in recent years. As penalties increasingly failed to discourage illegal trading outside the royal parks, Westminster city council sought and obtained Parliament's approval for tougher measures. The main element of these is to allow Westminster city council to seize property used in the commission of unlicensed trading. That puts an immediate and effective stop to the illegal act. The court is also provided with enhanced powers. On conviction it may impose a fine of up to level 3, which is currently £1,000, and may determine whether any property relating to the offence is to be forfeited.
The City of Westminster Act 1999 has already proved to work effectively—so effectively, in fact, that the consequence of the legislation has been to displace the illegal traders into the royal parks. I in no way criticise Westminster city council for its actions, which are both proper and effective. Parallel powers are now needed for the royal parks.
I turn now, therefore, to the specific provisions of this Bill. As I have indicated already to the Committee, it creates various powers to regulate illegal trading in the parks and other open spaces covered by the Parks Regulation (Amendment) Act 1926. The powers in the Bill are broadly comparable to the powers provided to deal with unlicensed traders in the city of Westminster.
Clause 1 allows my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to designate particular provisions of any regulations made under the Parks Regulation (Amendment) Act 1926 ``park trading regulations''. This designation will be achieved by regulations made under the 1926 Act. Any failure to comply with a park trading regulation will, from then on, be a ``park trading offence''.
The Bill has four other main provisions.
For park trading offences, it provides a penalty not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale. A level 3 fine, as we have just now noted, is currently £1,000. It provides a power of seizure by a constable of non-perishable items used in connection with illegal trading. It allows the Secretary of State, in specific circumstances, to retain and dispose of things seized. It provides a power to order forfeiture of things seized, exercisable by a magistrates court in the event of conviction.
The problem of illegal trading in the royal parks has increased in recent years. It will continue to increase—with all its detrimental effects—unless the police and the courts have adequate, but fair, powers to deal with it. It is the purpose of this Bill to provide these and I commend the Bill to the Committee.
| 
