| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Phil Gallie (Ayr): I thank my hon. Friend the Minister for the way in which he has responded to some of the points made in Committee. I fully endorse the amendments and welcome the fact that he sent to us his suggestions for model licensing conditions. In Committee we used the word "flexibility" a great deal with respect to applications in different parts of the country. The amendments allow for that flexibility.
Having said that, there are one or two words in the model licensing guidelines to which I take great exception. It is unfortunate that the phrase "chill-out areas" has been used, because it is associated with the world of drugs. As we said in Committee, the licensing conditions apply to venues that could be, and hopefully are, drug-free, but there is still a need for quiet areas and cool areas. Perhaps my hon. Friend the Minister will consider that when he puts together the final draft of the guidelines.
Mrs. Irene Adams (Paisley, North):
Like the hon. Member for Ayr (Mr. Gallie) I believe that the Minister has incorporated into the guidelines most of the things that we asked for in Committee. I am a little concerned that there are a few loose ends that need to be tied up. There must be some obligation to ensure that the conditions are laid down stringently.
I am concerned particularly about stewarding and the lack of a definition of what constitutes a steward. What sort of person will be employed as a steward? Will it be someone whom the licence holder will draft in for the night or will it be someone who is permanently employed? There does not seem to be any need for accreditation. Training is referred to in the model guidelines, but it is very loose in-house training. I would have preferred to see the stewards checked out and accredited by the police. All too often in the past, some of those doing the stewarding seem to be bigger thugs than those whom they were trying to escort from the premises.
We would not get into a taxi if the driver did not have a licence to carry passengers, but we often put our young people into the hands of stewards who have no expertise and who are just drafted in and paid by the night. We owe it to the young people attending these raves to ensure that the stewards are properly qualified.
We also have to apply that principle to whoever is in charge of providing medical attention. Again, we need to lay down more stringent guidelines. I know that some of the licence holders who came to see us talked about getting in paramedics on a regular basis, but we must tighten that up a little bit.
Mr. Sam Galbraith (Strathkelvin and Bearsden):
I should like to reiterate the points made by my hon. Friend the Member for Paisley, North (Mrs. Adams) about stewarding and the need to set guidelines. I know that there are some proposals from the CU Jimmy university to offer a degree in bouncing which may be helpful.I believe that one can obtain a degree in most things there. [Interruption.] Caledonian university is known in Tom Shiel's diary as the CU Jimmy university. I think--[Interruption.] The hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Campbell) just accused me of academic snobbery. That is a shocking accusation since we went to the same university.
Having said that, I welcome the amendment and what it is trying to do. I understand that part of the reason for it is the position taken by the Glasgow licensing board, which said that it would not lay down stipulations, for various reasons. That is wrong. The licensing authorities are not there as our moral guardians--that is a position for us to adopt--but they are there to regulate public order. They must not let their personal views interfere with the conditions necessary for good public order.
It is important to try to maintain some rational debate. I will take this opportunity to support the director of social work in Glasgow, Mary Hartnell, who tried to lay out the facts. We might not agree with some of the conclusions, but we should not dispute the facts. I do not blame those who condemned her because I know what it is like. Representatives from the press phone up and say, "So and so has said this." One gives a short, outraged, how can it possibly be, end-of-the-world-is-nigh response, only to find out that the person did not say anything in the first place.
It is important that there is uniformity across the country. We cannot have conditions in one area which mean that the problems shift elsewhere. In that respect, public opinion and other pressures might, of necessity, force licensing bodies to adopt some sort of uniformity because, if an area is lax, the raves will simply move in. The days of variation in regulations are over.
I remember when Glasgow and other councils had the right to ban certain films. It is preposterous that they should have been allowed to make such moral judgments. I remember that Glasgow banned a couple of films and we trooped down to the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Paisley, North to watch them. That was great business for Paisley, but we cannot have that.
I hope that the Minister will take on board the amendment tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall), which ensures that there is an obligatory aspect.
There should not be too much variation; absolute conditions should be laid down and rigorously enforced. In particular, I refer to the availability of drinking water and to the cups for drinking it. I can envisage a situation where a rave party takes place in a hangar, hundreds of people attend and the plastic cups run out--I suspect that they may be used for other things. These conditions have to be rigorously enforced. That brings me back to the licensing of stewards. If the conditions are not enforced, the stewards may have their licences withdrawn. With those caveats, I welcome the amendment.
Mr. Ian Davidson (Glasgow, Govan):
I support theamendment of the hon. Member for Dumbarton(Mr. McFall), particularly with reference to changing "may" to "shall". The House must clearly show that it wants to introduce the model licensing conditions that the Minister has circulated. I am particularly interested in chill-out areas, notwithstanding the argument of the hon. Member for Ayr (Mr. Gallie) with whom I agree on this point. I am also interested in the availability of drinking water.
I believe that there will be a financial temptation for people who run these social events to let the water run out and to have no cups available. Young people will then be obliged to buy drinks at exorbitant prices. Quite often, they have only a limited amount of money and they will choose to do without. For medical reasons, it is essential that they continue to take in fluids in considerable quantities.
Clearly question of public safety will operate in direct contradiction to the financial interests of the operators of the centres. In those circumstances, the local authority--which will come under great pressure from the licence holders--should not have the discretion to waive the facilities that we believe should be provided. Therefore, a "shall" rather than a "may" would be a much clearer way of stating the opinion of the House in this matter.
Mr. Menzies Campbell:
As I understand the purpose of the amendments moved by the Minister, they are to ensure that a common set of standards apply to events that are held in Scotland and covered by the Bill. With the creation of that common set of standards, the Secretary of State will have the discretion to lay down the standards. It leaves a substantial amount of discretion to the Secretary of State, and I do not normally encourage that, because I think discretion can be abused as easily as it can be properly implemented.
Against that, the amendment of the hon. Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall) would prescribe certain provisions that the Secretary of State has to incorporate willy-nilly in the guidance that he issues. I am not persuaded that that is the appropriate way to proceed. I believe that leaving this matter to the common sense of the Secretary of State is a much more effective way to realise some of the objectives that hon. Members are anxious to achieve.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |