| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Peston: Is the noble Lord saying, in terms, that the people who came to see him—I understand that some specific people came to see him—told him that if they were not given this rather small concession they would go out of business? Have they told the noble Lord in terms that their businesses depend on this small, discreet advertisement being available to them? I must admit that I wonder where on the margin of production they find themselves if that is the determining factor.
Lord Monson: I did not say that anyone had come to see me about this matter. I believe that the noble Lord, Lord Peston, must have misheard. But they have told people who are more closely concerned with the issue that they are worried about it. That is the whole point.
I ask both the Minister and the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, to be open-minded about this matter, as the noble Lord, Lord Naseby, asked them to be. Would they consider looking at the Dutch experience before we reach the next stage of the Bill? I do not believe that that is too much to ask. If the system seems to be working effectively in Holland, and if people are not taking advantage of the so-called Xloopholes" to push cigarettes when, in the normal way, they would not be allowed to do so, there is no reason why it should not work just as well in this country.
Obviously I realise that the noble Lord cannot give any promises about what he will accept at the next stage, but at least if he was to agree to look at any evidence put before him and possibly to reflect upon it, I should be very grateful. I do not expect to receive a response straight away.
Lord Naseby: Before the noble Lord sits down, with regard to the plea that he is making, does he believe that we shall have a Report stage? With the best will in the world, I do not believe that that will take place before the Christmas Recess. It may do so; one never knows with the Liberal Democrat Whips. I say that, in particular, having known those Whips in some depth over the years. However, I consider it to be unlikely. We shall certainly not have it next week.
I understand that the promoter of the Bill has not sought to see the specialist tobacconists. I find that surprising. I believe that in a Bill of this nature, where a particular interest stands out, it is very unusual for the promoter to have chosen not to contact that interest. Perhaps we could add to the plea that the promoter of the Bill should, first, make contact with the trade association and, secondly, see that there is some means of contacting those who are not members of that association.
Lord Monson: I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Naseby, for what I consider to be a very useful suggestion. I believe that it would be better if some of the specialist tobacconists who are not aware of this matter were made aware of it. Perhaps they would meet half way. Perhaps they will approach the noble
Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, or perhaps the approach could be made the other way round. However, perhaps the Government will keep an open mind about the Dutch model. If they believe that there are any reasons why such a model would not work here, obviously they can say so. Is it possible to give an undertaking that that will happen before the next stage? Perhaps the Government are reserving judgment on that.
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: I had already said to the noble Lord, Lord Naseby, that we would be happy to look at research or evidence, as your Lordships would expect. I also said that I thought that the approach in the Bill was fairly robust in the context of UK legislation.
Lord Monson: I am grateful to the Minister for that assurance. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendments Nos. 50 to 52 not moved.]
The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Viscount Simon): I take this opportunity to say that the numbers voting Not Content in the Division were 56 and not 55, as announced.
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: I suggest that now might be a convenient time to adjourn our discussions on the Bill. I beg to move that the House be now resumed.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.
- House adjourned at twenty-nine minutes before four o'clock.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |