(1 year, 9 months ago)
Commons ChamberThis text is a record of ministerial contributions to a debate held as part of the Licensing Hours Extensions Act 2026 passage through Parliament.
In 1993, the House of Lords Pepper vs. Hart decision provided that statements made by Government Ministers may be taken as illustrative of legislative intent as to the interpretation of law.
This extract highlights statements made by Government Ministers along with contextual remarks by other members. The full debate can be read here
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I feel quite intoxicated by the number of local licensed premises that have been mentioned this morning. It must have set some sort of record. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham (Andrew Ranger) on his success in the ballot for private Members’ Bills—in the 20 years I have been a Member I have never had any success in it. I also congratulate him on his decision to pick this worthwhile topic as the subject for his Bill and I recognise his long career in the hospitality sector, as well as his clear expertise in the area. I am also incredibly impressed by the detailed knowledge Members have of licensed premises in their constituencies. I note the mention of the all-party parliamentary group on beer, which is obviously an important group and has a large and thriving membership.
I am grateful for the contributions of other hon. Members to the debate. I note the contributions from the right hon. Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Holden), who I think it is fair to say has a great deal of experience in pubs, and from my hon. Friend the Member for Clwyd North (Gill German) who talked about the Welsh perspective. I admire the determination of my hon. Friend the Member for Bangor Aberconwy (Claire Hughes) to visit all her local pubs. I enjoyed hearing about the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Northampton South (Mike Reader) being the home of certain breweries. My hon. Friend the Member for Barking (Nesil Caliskan) reminded us of the importance of the Bill’s proposals to restaurants, cafes and the high street, talking about the 65 hospitality sites in her constituency and the 1,000 people employed by them.
I am pleased to say that there has been a high degree of consensus on this measure, and I can say from the outset that the Government support the Bill and will do what we can to facilitate its passage here and in the other place. I also pay tribute to the work of my hon. Friend the Member for South Shields (Mrs Lewell-Buck) who led on this issue in the last Parliament, and managed to get her Bill through this place, although the general election intervened, unfortunately, before it could make its way on to the statute books.
My hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham, in his excellent speech, set out a compelling case for the Bill. Section 172 of the Licensing Act 2003 already makes provision for the Secretary of State to make an order that relaxes licensing hours in England and Wales for
“an occasion of exceptional international, national, or local significance”.
In practice, the Home Secretary determines whether an occasion meets those criteria on a case-by-case basis, and orders must specify the dates and times of the relaxations.
First, such orders bring about benefits to businesses, which can stay open for longer and thus increase revenue. Secondly, communities also benefit, as they are able to come together to celebrate important events. Thirdly, orders benefit licensing authorities, which do not have to process large numbers of licence extensions individually, often in a very limited time period.
Of course, it is for businesses to decide whether they wish to take advantage of extensions, but if they do wish to stay open, a blanket licensing extension automatically means that they do not have to give a temporary event notice to their local authority, which saves them time as well as the associated fee.
Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)
As a former licensing board member, I welcome this Bill. Pubs in Falkirk would certainly have benefited from extensions during the Euro 2020 and Euro 2024 finals, as well as for the world cup final in 2023, and I declare an interest as a member of the tartan army. We need to recognise the impact that extensions have on hospitality workers in the Bill. Would the Minister endorse Unite’s “Get Me Home Safely” campaign and encourage businesses who are going to benefit from this extension to make sure that their staff get home safely?
Absolutely. My hon. Friend makes an important point about ensuring that those who work in hospitality are well protected and that getting them home is an important part of employers’ duty to keep their workforce safe. In the past, licensing hours have been relaxed for high-profile royal events, such as His Majesty the King’s coronation, Her Late Majesty the Queen’s 90th birthday and her platinum jubilee, as well as the royal weddings in 2018 and 2011. Licensing hours have also been extended for sporting events, including the FIFA world cup 2014, the Euro 2020 final and the Euro 2024 semi-final and final. When the Government have proposed extensions to licensing hours, they have received cross-party support in both Houses and have been passed unopposed.
As we have heard, the Licensing Act specifies that any order is subject to the affirmative procedure and needs to be approved by both Houses of Parliament before it comes into force. The Bill proposes to amend the Licensing Act so that these orders are subject to the negative resolution procedure, rather than the affirmative procedure. That will enable extensions to be implemented at short notice if necessary, including when Parliament is in recess. The current arrangements means that fast-paced extensions are simply not always possible. That is problematic in the context of sporting events, as the participation of national teams in the later stages of competitions is uncertain until the last moment.
I will provide an example to illustrate that. In 2021, the England men’s team made it through to the final of the delayed Euro 2020 tournament. With the help of the usual channels, the previous Government managed to push an order through Parliament in the three days between the semi-final and the final. To emphasise my earlier point, I note there was complete agreement across the House for the measure. In the summer of 2023, the England women’s team equally commendably reached the final of the world cup. However, that tournament took place in the summer when Parliament was in recess, so it was sadly not possible to extend licensing hours for the match. The Bill will rectify this issue and ensure that licensing hours can be extended at short notice when necessary, including when Parliament is in recess.
Does the Minister not share my concern that this is a Bill of very limited ambition? Considering what she has said, surely there is a strong case for deregulating this whole area and for getting Parliament and the Government out of hospitality businesses’ hair.
The measures before us are simple and straightforward, and the debate shows there is widespread agreement in the House about them. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will, in this case, not cause any problems to the Bill going forward.
The Bill will rectify the issues we have been discussing and streamline the parliamentary process, but it does not seek to alter the fundamental content of the Licensing Act 2003. However, the Government fully intend to plan ahead, so that wherever possible licensing hour extension orders in England and Wales can be brought in with time for full public consultation. The power in section 172 of the Licensing Act has, rightly, been used sparingly, and there is no intention to change the frequency with which the relevant powers are invoked.
As the Minister for Policing, Fire and Crime Prevention, it is important that I make clear that the police have generally been supportive of extensions for royal events, and that there have been no major increases in crime and disorder attributable to temporary extended drinking hours. However, the police have previously expressed some concerns about licensing extensions relating to sporting events, namely football. It is therefore of the utmost importance that the police have the opportunity to put forward their views, and we will always give due weight to any concerns raised before pressing ahead with an extension of licensing hours.
The Government recognise the importance of providing the police with ample time to put in place additional policing measures that may be necessary to minimise any potential increase in crime and disorder as a result of any temporary licensing hours extension. To that end, the Government remain firmly committed to continuing to plan in advance, wherever possible.
In conclusion, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham for bringing forward the legislation and those who have spoken in support of it. It is a simple measure that will free up parliamentary time, help the Government to continue to support businesses and local authorities, and allow for celebrations of important events in the life of the nation. The Government fully support the Bill, and it is very important to get it passed before last orders.
(1 year, 4 months ago)
Public Bill CommitteesThis text is a record of ministerial contributions to a debate held as part of the Licensing Hours Extensions Act 2026 passage through Parliament.
In 1993, the House of Lords Pepper vs. Hart decision provided that statements made by Government Ministers may be taken as illustrative of legislative intent as to the interpretation of law.
This extract highlights statements made by Government Ministers along with contextual remarks by other members. The full debate can be read here
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Andrew Ranger (Wrexham) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John. I am pleased to bring the Licensing Hours Extensions Bill before the Committee.
Section 172 of the Licensing Act 2003 enables the Secretary of State to make an order to relax licensing hours in licensed premises in England and Wales for occasions
“of exceptional international, national, or local significance”.
I am sure we all agree that pubs and other hospitality venues hold a special and significant place in our communities. They often sit at the very heart of them. They transcend generations, help to combat loneliness and bring us together. When moments of national importance emerge, many people gravitate towards them to share those moments.
Not only does relaxing licensing hours ensure that communities can mark such special occasions together, but it reduces unnecessary and time-consuming bureaucracy for local authorities and for the hospitality industry. Currently, the relevant legislation requires the affirmative procedure to be followed to implement such extensions. The Bill proposes a simple change that will enable them to be brought about via the negative procedure, thereby freeing up valuable parliamentary time.
What will change? As the Committee will be aware, the affirmative procedure requires that we debate any order to extend licensing hours in both Houses. The Bill will remove the mandatory requirement for such debates. Instead, hon. Members will be able to pray against an extension if they consider it appropriate to do so, which in turn may trigger a debate. Previous orders to extend licensing hours in such circumstances have passed unopposed and with overwhelming support. The Bill will reduce the burden on parliamentary time and resources, while still allowing concerns to be expressed.
The criteria for making an extension will remain unchanged. The Government remain committed to using the power only on a limited basis. The ability to make an order to extend licensing hours lies with the Home Secretary; all such decisions are made on a case-by-case basis. In practical terms, the hope is that the Bill will ensure that the next time we see the next great sporting or other occasion that justifies a relaxing of hours, no pub or hospitality venue will miss out on the chance to open its doors to its local community a little earlier or later and to enjoy everything that comes with such an occasion.
Clause 1 will permit the Home Secretary to make such extension orders when they are deemed appropriate, without having to go through unnecessary parliamentary hurdles. Clause 2 will simply mean that the Bill comes into force on the day of Royal Assent and extends to England and Wales only. As no amendments have been tabled, my hope is that the Committee will agree to both clauses of the Bill.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir John. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham on promoting a Bill that has been greeted so warmly by the House, and on laying out the case for it so clearly and succinctly today.
This is a Government-backed Bill that will cut red tape and claim back valuable parliamentary time while bringing benefits in the form of increased revenues for businesses and reducing burdens on licensing authorities. I thank my right hon. Friend the Minister for Policing and Crime Prevention, who has been working on the Bill; I am speaking in her place, as she is unable to be present.
The Bill will make an amendment to the Licensing Act to allow licensing extensions to be made more quickly and simply. Furthermore, it will make it possible to extend licensing hours for significant events at short notice even when Parliament is not sitting. Under section 172 of the Act, the Secretary of State may make an order that relaxes licensing hours in England and Wales for
“an occasion of exceptional international, national, or local significance”.
Decisions to extend licensing hours in such circumstances are considered on a case-by-case basis, as my hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham mentioned. The Government will continue to use the power sparingly.
Currently, the affirmative parliamentary procedure is mandatory—my hon. Friend made that point effectively—in the making of such an order, meaning that it requires the approval of both Houses before coming into force. The Bill will make a very simple alteration to the Licensing Act so that the negative resolution procedure is used instead, allowing extensions to licensing hours to be processed without using up valuable parliamentary time. There has always been agreement across the House that we should move forward in such circumstances, for the reasons that my hon. Friend outlined: it benefits all our constituents when they can come together on very special occasions and spend time in pubs and restaurants in our communities. Objections may still be made, where applicable, under the negative resolution procedure, so Parliament will still have a role.
The negative procedure also has the benefit of allowing licensing hours extensions to be made in the rare event that they are needed during parliamentary recesses or at short notice. Following the affirmative procedure is problematic when an order needs to be made at short notice, such as during a sporting event, when the gap between one of the national teams qualifying for the later stages of the competition and the next match is likely to be only a matter of days. In 2021, an emergency order had to be rushed through Parliament at extremely short notice when the England men’s football team reached the final of Euro 2020. In 2023, when the England women’s team progressed to the world cup final, it was not possible to temporarily extend licensing hours, because the House was in recess.
Licensing hours have previously been relaxed for significant royal occasions, such as the platinum jubilee of Her late Majesty the Queen, and for events of significant national importance, such as the recent VE Day 80th anniversary, as well as for major sporting events. Those extensions received cross-party support in both Houses, as was particularly evident during the recent debate on the VE Day extension, which was warmly welcomed by both Houses.
Extending licensing hours for such occasions means that communities can come together in collective celebration, businesses can reap the benefit of increased revenue and local authorities can be spared the burden of processing high volumes of single extensions. We can all appreciate the welcome boost that that will bring to our local economies: we estimate that it could be up to £500,000 on each occasion.
For businesses, taking advantage of such blanket extensions and remaining open for the additional hours is, of course, optional. The Government will continue to plan ahead for such events as much as we can, not least because it is important to ensure as far as possible that the public can have their say through consultation and that key partners such as the police are engaged and have adequate time to prepare.
The Bill is a simple and modest measure that aims to give back valuable parliamentary time and will undoubtedly benefit our businesses, our local authorities and the communities that they serve across England and Wales; it will be for Scotland and Northern Ireland to bring in their own measures. Keeping our pubs open for longer on such occasions will give people the opportunity to join in celebrations and to raise a glass collectively, as a community. The Government therefore fully support the Bill. I hope that it will continue to have a straightforward passage through the House, and I congratulate my hon. Friend on introducing it.
Andrew Ranger
I thank my hon. Friend the Minister for her remarks, the Government for their support for the Bill, all members of the Committee for their attendance, and officials in the House and in the Home Office for their assistance in getting the Bill to this point. I think we have covered it in sufficient detail. Thank you for your chairmanship, Sir John.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 1 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Bill to be reported, without amendment.
(1 year, 3 months ago)
Commons ChamberThis text is a record of ministerial contributions to a debate held as part of the Licensing Hours Extensions Act 2026 passage through Parliament.
In 1993, the House of Lords Pepper vs. Hart decision provided that statements made by Government Ministers may be taken as illustrative of legislative intent as to the interpretation of law.
This extract highlights statements made by Government Ministers along with contextual remarks by other members. The full debate can be read here
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Watford (Matt Turmaine) and to others who spoke in the debate, including my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin), for their contributions. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Watford for speaking on behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham (Andrew Ranger), who introduced the Bill, and I am grateful to be speaking on behalf of the Minister for Policing and Crime Prevention, my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull North and Cottingham (Dame Diana Johnson).
Throughout proceedings on the Bill, there has been a high degree of consensus on the measures it contains, and I am pleased to say that the Government fully support it. I recognise the depth of experience that my hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham brings to it, with his 25-plus years in the hospitality sector. Rightly, the Bill supports the sector, which is responsible for around 2.6 million jobs in our country and is an important part of our local and national economy.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Watford explained, section 172 of the Licensing Act 2003 makes provision for the Secretary of State to make an order that relaxes licensing hours in England and Wales on an occasion of exceptional international, national or local significance. In practice, the Home Secretary determines whether an occasion meets the criteria on a case-by-case basis, and any orders that are brought forward must specify the dates and times of the relaxations. Such orders benefit businesses, which can stay open for longer; communities, which can come together to celebrate important events; and licensing authorities, which do not have to process a large number of individual licence extensions. Of course, it is still for individual businesses to decide whether they wish to take advantage of any extension, but if businesses do wish to stay open, a blanket licensing extension means that individual businesses do not have to give a temporary event notice to their local authority, saving them time as well as the associated fee.
The Bill will amend the Licensing Act 2003 so that relaxation orders can be made via the negative resolution procedure, rather than the current affirmative procedure. In the past, we have relaxed licensing hours for high-profile royal events, such as Her late Majesty the Queen’s platinum jubilee and the coronation of His Majesty the King; other events of significant national importance, such as the recent celebrations on the 80th anniversary of VE Day; and major sporting events, including the finals of the men’s European championship football tournaments in 2020 and 2024, and the women’s European championship this summer.
Let me summarise the benefits of changing the procedure. First, by removing the need for businesses to submit individual temporary event notices and, subsequently, for local authorities to work tirelessly in processing them, we will reduce the burden placed on those organisations. Hospitality venues will also have one fewer administrative task to process as they prepare for events.
Secondly, as I have previously mentioned, a more practical reason for making this change is that, as well as being used for royal occasions—for which there is plenty of notice—licensing extensions can be used when one of our national football teams makes it to the final of a tournament. Given the nature of how these competitions play out, there is very little time between the team qualifying for a key match and the match taking place.
In the summer of 2021, the England men’s team made it to the final of the delayed Euro 2020 tournament; thankfully, with the help of colleagues of different parties, we were able to swiftly put an order in place in the three days between the semi-final and the final. In the summer of 2023, however, the England women’s team reached the final of the World cup, which took place when Parliament was in recess. As such, it was not possible to extend licensing hours. Changing the process to the negative procedure will mean that an order can be made when Parliament is in recess, so that we can avoid such a situation arising again. History has shown that there is clearly cross-party support for this measure, which is important to colleagues on both sides of the House.
Having outlined the benefits of being able to make orders swiftly, I will briefly make some remarks about how the Government will consider what needs to be in place when using the powers. We are clear that the Government must continue to plan ahead so that, wherever possible, licensing hours extension orders can be made in time for prior public consultation. It is also important to make it clear that the police have generally been supportive of extensions for royal events, and that no noticeable issues have been attributed to extended drinking hours. Indeed, many people might like to drink non-alcoholic beverages, which are available in almost all pubs and restaurants across the country.
The Government recognise the importance of providing the police with ample time to put in place any additional policing measures that may be necessary to prevent an increase in crime or disorder in our communities, and we make sure that their views on these matters are heard in advance. To that end, the Government remain firmly committed to continuing to plan in advance wherever possible.
The power in section 172 of the Licensing Act has been used sparingly, and rightly so. As the statutory guidance that accompanies the Licensing Act sets out, it should normally be possible for those applying for premises licences to anticipate special occasions. The change will apply to England and Wales only. I once again thank my hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham and others who have spoken in support of this important new measure.
Question put and agreed to.
Bill accordingly read the Third time and passed.
(11 months, 3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberThis text is a record of ministerial contributions to a debate held as part of the Licensing Hours Extensions Act 2026 passage through Parliament.
In 1993, the House of Lords Pepper vs. Hart decision provided that statements made by Government Ministers may be taken as illustrative of legislative intent as to the interpretation of law.
This extract highlights statements made by Government Ministers along with contextual remarks by other members. The full debate can be read here
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Lord in Waiting/Government Whip (Lord Lemos) (Lab)
Oh dear—the noble Lord, Lord Sandhurst, has presented me with a with a rhetorical challenge to which I shall not attempt to rise.
I thank my noble friend Lord Watson for sponsoring this Bill and congratulate him on a wonderfully eloquent speech. I also thank my honourable friend the Member for Wrexham, who introduced the Bill and helped secure its successful passage in the other place. The Bill has enjoyed cross-party consensus and has the Government’s full support; I have been delighted to hear the words of support from around your Lordships’ House this morning.
I thank the noble Lord, Lord Hayward, for drawing our attention to the long—though not too long—history of this important deregulatory measure. Section 172 of the Licensing Act 2003 allows the Secretary of State to relax licensing hours in England and Wales for occasions of exceptional international, national or local significance, as many noble Lords have said. Each case is considered on its merits and any order specifies the relevant times and dates. As noble Lords have noted, these orders bring practical benefits: businesses can open for longer, communities can celebrate together and licensing authorities are spared the considerable administrative burden of processing numerous individual applications. Importantly, no premises is obliged to extend its hours, but a blanket extension removes the need for temporary event notices, saving considerable time and cost.
The Bill proposes a targeted procedural change to allow such orders to be made under the negative resolution procedure, rather than the current affirmative procedure. As noble Lords have noted, this is a modest but important reform. The power has been used sparingly and only for events of genuine significance. My noble friend Lord Watson identified occasions on which we have used it, such as Her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II’s Platinum Jubilee, the Coronation of His Majesty the King, the 80th anniversary of VE Day and major sporting events such as the UEFA European Championship. The proposed changes offer several advantages.
First, they reduce unnecessary and considerable administrative pressures. A single time-limited relaxation removes the need for thousands of separate notices and the associated resource demands. This is particularly valuable for the hospitality sector. A number of noble Lords have referred to the importance of the hospitality sector. As of March 2025, the hospitality sector supported 2.6 million jobs—slightly more than the noble Baroness, Lady Monckton, referred to—and 174,000 businesses across the UK.
Earlier this year, the DBT and HMT commissioned a task force to consider how the licensing regime could better support the hospitality sector. I draw attention to this because a number of noble Lords have asked what we are doing to support the hospitality sector. Since the Bill relates to licensing reform, I should put this on the record. The task force report, published in July, made 10 recommendations, the majority of which the Government support. Earlier this month, a call for evidence was launched to seek further views on these recommended actions. The call for evidence is due to close very soon, on 6 November. Proposals include a national licensing policy framework, a review of outdated licence conditions and an increase in the permitted number of temporary notices. I know that this does not answer every consideration that noble Lords have raised, but I hope it gives some reassurance that the Government are taking the licensing framework seriously and taking action.
I congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Monckton, on what sounds like a wonderful project in Brighton. The North Star sounds like the perfect name. I admire what she is doing there, but she would not expect me to comment on suggestions for the Budget, and I will not. It is above my pay grade.
The second thing to which I want to draw attention, and for me the most important aspect of these reforms, on which I have spoken in your Lordships’ House before, is that these extensions serve a vital social purpose. They enable communities to come together and celebrate together—whether for royal milestones, sporting achievements or moments of rather more sombre national reflection—within licensed, regulated environments. This fosters civic pride, community cohesion and safer and more resilient communities. For my money, I emphasise that bringing communities together seems the most important benefit of this measure.
A number of noble Lords have drawn attention to the problem of timeliness that we have at the moment. Some occasions, especially sporting finals, arise at short notice, giving rise to a great deal of expectancy among the nation about where we will end up. In 2021, when the England men’s team reached the Euro 2020 final, an order was made within three days, as my noble friend Lord Watson and the noble Lord, Lord Hayward, mentioned. However, as noted, in 2023 when the England women’s team reached the World Cup final, it was not possible to extend licensing hours because we were in recess. That does not seem a very good explanation. The negative procedure would allow orders to be made even when Parliament is not sitting, ensuring a swift and proportionate response. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Bailey, for his important work on loneliness, and draw attention, as he did, to the benefit of this Bill regarding loneliness.
Concerns about reduced scrutiny, if any were to be raised, are unfounded. Under the negative resolution procedure, any order remains subject to annulment by either House, preserving Parliament’s ability to scrutinise and challenge as appropriate. The power in Section 172 will continue to be used sparingly, only for occasions of exceptional and important significance. The statutory guidance is clear. Regular special occasions should be anticipated in operating schedules, and the criteria for extensions will remain strictly applied. As the noble Lord, Lord Sandhurst, noted, there is no evidence that these extensions lead to problems of anti-social behaviour or disorder.
The Bill applies only to England and Wales, as licensing is devolved in Scotland and Northern Ireland. It delivers a focused procedural improvement with real-world benefits, reducing bureaucracy, supporting community celebration and enabling timely action without diminishing parliamentary oversight. The Government fully support the Bill, and I know that noble Lords do also. I am afraid that I cannot end my speech quite as wonderfully as the noble Lord, Lord Sandhurst, but I hope I have conveyed even a boring Minister’s enthusiasm for this measure.
(8 months, 3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberThis text is a record of ministerial contributions to a debate held as part of the Licensing Hours Extensions Act 2026 passage through Parliament.
In 1993, the House of Lords Pepper vs. Hart decision provided that statements made by Government Ministers may be taken as illustrative of legislative intent as to the interpretation of law.
This extract highlights statements made by Government Ministers along with contextual remarks by other members. The full debate can be read here
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Earl of Effingham (Con)
My Lords, I thank all noble Lords who have made valuable contributions to this Private Member’s Bill as it has made its way through your Lordships’ House. When in government, we did indeed support a similar version of the Bill as proposed by Emma Lewell from the other place, which sadly failed to pass before the general election. His Majesty’s loyal Opposition are therefore pleased to welcome the measures in the Bill as put forward by the noble Lord, Lord Watson. We thank him for his work on the Bill, in addition to his efforts to promote all sectors of the UK music industry as chair of UK Music.
At Second Reading, many noble Lords shared their extensive knowledge of the hospitality sector and the meaningful, positive impact that this legislation will have. Ensuring that pubs, bars and other licensed venues can adapt during national celebrations such as royal events, major sporting victories or cultural milestones is beneficial to both businesses and communities, allowing everyone to celebrate together and contributing in some part to economic growth. Replacing an affirmative resolution with a negative resolution statutory instrument provides a faster and simpler mechanism while at the same time retaining the option for consultation and maintaining the relevant safeguards. The net result should be that everyone benefits.
Lord in Waiting/Government Whip (Lord Lemos) (Lab)
My Lords, if your Lordships pass this Bill today, it will not go back to the Commons but go straight to His Majesty the King for Royal Assent. I thank my noble friend Lord Watson for bringing the Bill forward and congratulate him, as well as my honourable friends Andrew Ranger and Emma Lewell in the other place.
I wondered whether we should extend the licensing hours to celebrate the passing of this Bill, but I do not intend to test the opinion of the House on that question. The Chief Whip would have a heart attack, and I understand that he has plans for the weekend. It would also bring my late-blooming political career to an abrupt end. In an earlier debate on this Bill, the noble Lord, Lord Sandhurst, promised to drink more British beer if the Bill passes, so I think the drinks in the North Star are on the Opposition.
I do not want to trivialise the Bill. As well as the obvious economic benefits of this change, what we celebrate, when we celebrate, how we celebrate, where we celebrate and with whom we celebrate are all markers of our shared national identity. These are the occasions when, as a nation, we show the better angels of our nature. With that, and with my thanks again to my noble friend Lord Watson and all those who have supported this Bill, with the Government’s support, I commend the Bill to the House.