Licensing Hours Extensions Bill
Lord Watson of Wyre Forest
That the Bill be now read a second time.
Lord Watson of Wyre Forest (Lab)
My Lords, my noble friend Lord Murphy of Torfaen may have been hesitant to talk about elections this morning, but the Bill I propose may allow him to drown his sorrows a little easier. It is a genuine privilege to bring forward the Licensing Hours Extension Bill, a small but meaningful reform that will make a tangible difference to hospitality businesses, local communities and the millions of people who gather in pubs across England and Wales.
The Bill has travelled a steady, consensual path. It nearly reached this House before the last general election, under the stewardship of my colleague Emma Lewell. I am pleased to say that it received cross-party support when both she and my honourable friend Andrew Ranger, the Member for Wrexham, guided it through the Commons. It was supported by Ministers in both Governments, and that breadth of agreement reflects something rare and precious: a shared recognition of the cultural, social and economic importance of the great British pub, so ably represented by the good people of the British Beer & Pub Association, known to all Members of this House, which also supports this legislation.
The Bill makes a straightforward amendment to the Licensing Act 2003, the legislation that sets out the framework for four licensable activities: the sale of alcohol, and its supply, the provision of regulated entertainment, and the provision of late-night refreshment. Under Section 172 of that Act, the Secretary of State has the power to make an order extending licensing hours across England and Wales to mark occasions of
“exceptional international, national, or local significance”.
These national extensions allow all licensed premises to stay open for longer, should they wish to do so.
Over the past two decades, the power has been used sparingly, but effectively. It has enabled communities to celebrate together during the royal weddings in 2011 and 2018; Her late Majesty the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee in 2012; the Platinum Jubilee in 2022; and His Majesty the King’s Coronation in 2023. More recently, it was used to mark the 80th anniversary of VE Day earlier this year, and during major sporting events such as Euro 2020—played in 2021—and Euro 2024, in which the England men’s football team participated. Most recently, licensing hours were extended when the Lionesses achieved their magnificent victory in securing a second European Championship title.
These nationally shared moments remind us that the role of the pub is not just commercial; pubs are the beating hearts of our communities. They are places where we come together in times of joy, pride and sometimes sorrow. They are where strangers become friends, where neighbours meet and where the shared story of our national life unfolds. Two-thirds of adults believe their local pub plays a vital role in tackling loneliness and social isolation. For many, especially in rural areas or small towns, it is the one place where the door is generally always open and where a conversation is never far away.
Economically too, this sector is a powerhouse: some 45,000 pubs and nearly 2,000 breweries support over a million jobs. They contribute £34 billion in gross value added to the economy and generate £18 billion in tax revenue. Almost half the workforce is aged between 16 and 24, making pubs and hospitality one of the most significant sources of opportunity for young people entering the labour market. Pubs sustain high streets in every part of the country, from great cities to small coastal towns. They sponsor local football teams, host community meetings and support charity events. They help our villages remain viable and our cities vibrant. And yet, despite their value, too many publicans face obstacles that make their work harder than it needs to be.
Under the current system, when a moment of national significant arises—whether a royal celebration, a major sporting final or a solemn occasion of mourning—pubs and hospitality venues often face unnecessary bureaucracy. They must either apply individually for a temporary event notice, which costs money and requires at least 10 days’ notice, or they must wait for Parliament to approve a blanket extension through the affirmative procedure. If Parliament is not sitting, that flexibility simply does not exist.
We saw the consequences of that in August 2023, when the Lionesses reached the World Cup final. It was a huge moment of national pride, watched by millions, yet thousands of venues were unable to open early and allow communities to come together. The Government could not extend licensing hours across England and Wales because there was not time to secure approval in both Houses. The Bill seeks to correct that. It replaces the affirmative procedure with the negative resolution procedure. In practice, that means that the Home Secretary may grant a temporary national extension to licensing hours more swiftly, without requiring a debate in both Houses, while preserving Parliament’s right to object. This is a pragmatic change that makes the system flexible, responsive and fit for purpose. It removes red tape, saves businesses money and ensures that we can respond in real time to moments that bring the nation together.
There is also a practical economic benefit. National license extensions save every affected business the cost and administrative burden of applying individually for a temporary event notice—£21 per application—while relieving local licensing authorities of the work involved in processing large numbers of requests in a short period of time.
At the same time, the Bill safeguards parliamentary scrutiny. If any Member of either House objects to a proposed extension, they retain the right to pray against it, meaning a debate can still take place. The only difference is that such a debate would not be automatic. This approach strikes the right balance between efficiency and accountability. As past experience shows, national extensions of this kind have been universally welcomed and commanded broad consensus. It is difficult to imagine objection to an extension marking a royal jubilee, a Coronation or a major sporting event.
Importantly, the Bill does not alter the criteria for extensions. National orders will still be determined on a case-by-case basis by the Secretary of State, normally the Home Secretary, and will be introduced only for events that are, in the words of the Licensing Act,
“of exceptional international, national, or local significance”.
The process for temporary event notices remains unchanged.
The Bill, then, is both a modest and meaningful change. It is a technical adjustment, but one that will bring real benefits to business and communities alike. It recognises that pubs are more than places of trade— they are spaces of togetherness and continuity in an age when many of our shared rituals have frayed. It acknowledges that our legislative processes must be nimble enough to keep pace with modern life. In a country where a football final, a royal commemoration or a moment of remembrance can unite millions, it should not be impossible for our communities to celebrate or to reflect together simply because of procedural delay.
The hospitality industry continues to recover from the shocks of the pandemic and sustained cost pressures. Many landlords and staff have had to show extraordinary resilience. Removing unnecessary administrative barriers, even small ones, sends an important signal of confidence and respect for their role in our national life.
The Bill embodies a simple principle: that government should trust communities and businesses to come together responsibly in moments that matter. It removes friction without removing oversight, and it tidies a process that has outlived its practicality while preserving the checks and balances that Parliament rightly expects. It also reminds us of something beyond procedure. When the national anthem plays in a crowded pub, when glasses are raised in memory of a monarch or in celebration of a local hero, when laughter and conversation spill out into the street after a match, we see the best of who we are—neighbours, friends and citizens, bound by shared experience.
The Bill cannot solve every challenge facing our pubs and brewers but it is a step in the right direction. It is proportionate, practical and unifying. It ensures that the Secretary of State can act swiftly when the nation wishes to come together, and that Parliament can still hold Ministers to account if it so chooses. For all these reasons, I commend the Licensing Hours Extensions Bill to the House and invite your Lordships to give it a Second Reading. I beg to move.
Baroness Monckton of Dallington Forest (Con)
My Lords, I declare my interest as chair and founder of Team Domenica.
When I joined your Lordships’ House, I vowed to speak only on things that I knew about, so your Lordships might be surprised to see me on my feet for this licensing Bill. However, in a few weeks’ time my charity is opening a pub in Brighton. This has required major investment for the acquisition, refurbishment and training facilities, funded by a combination of donations and a significant mortgage. It will give enhanced training opportunities for our candidates, in addition to our existing cafes and coffee roastery. When I asked Jeremy Clarkson for advice, his reply was succinct: “Don’t do it”. This was followed by a list of all the things that could and would go wrong.
Before I go into that, I would like to start by saying that I have no objection whatever to cutting the red tape and regulatory costs around opening hours, and I acknowledge that the Bill could be only a good thing for the industry. However, I have broader concerns.
My team are currently recruiting staff at all levels for the pub, and they have been flabbergasted by the hundreds of applications that they have received for every single job that we have advertised—and this is in Brighton, a city where hospitality is a major component of the economy. As recently as two years ago, hospitality venues were really struggling to fill vacancies. The impact of last year’s Budget is huge, and has been immediate, concentrated and socially regressive.
According to PAYE data published by the Office for National Statistics, 110,000 jobs have been lost in this sector between June 2024 and July 2025. Hospitality now employs 2.1 million people, and 60% of them are under 25. It is an entry level into work for young people, particularly those with no skills or qualifications, for those needing support into work, and for those people—such as our candidates—with learning disabilities, for whom a job can be life transforming. The new NIC threshold means an employer is paying tax on someone working seven to eight hours a week rather than 16 to 18 as previously. This has had a negative impact on an industry which largely relies on part-time workers and has caused pubs to slash jobs and decrease opening hours. I fear that the Employment Rights Bill coming down the track will make employing this cohort even more challenging, and the benefits bill will therefore increase on its alarming upward curve.
The Government need to start being serious about measures that will grow the economy and create jobs. They should reverse this threshold change and even take it higher than it was before the last Budget. In fact, UKHospitality lobbied for such a raise in the threshold before the last Budget to create jobs, and the Government did the opposite, without any consultation or impact assessment.
In its recent report, the Institute of Economic Affairs said:
“Employment and vacancies are down, working-age inactivity remains an apparently intractable problem, and unemployment continues its upward creep. Job losses are particularly noticeable in retailing and hospitality”.
A third of all minimum wage workers work in shops, bars and restaurants. This recent hike in employer national insurance contributions has brought many part-time workers into the Government’s net who were previously exempt.
Alan Vallance, the CEO of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, said last week that the country
“faces a damaging cliff edge if the Chancellor decides to raid businesses again”.
He said that businesses trying to deliver growth are being held back. Firms are telling him that it is
“too expensive to do business, with confidence in free-fall over skyrocketing operating costs amid high taxes, an outdated business rates system and soaring energy bills”.
UKHospitality has put forward several ideas and can demonstrate in each case what the real benefits would be to the economy and public finances. Here are a few of them. The first thing it suggests is to lower business rates to revive the high streets. Business rates are a sin tax on running community-based businesses. Our high streets and hospitality venues are a vital and economic resource.
The next suggestion is to fix NICs to boost jobs. Sectors such as hospitality, which provide accessible careers, have been hit hardest, as I just said. The impact on someone earning £25,000 a year was twice as bad as on someone earning £150,000, and the largest number of job losses have been in hospitality. Exemptions should include those at the start of their careers and people returning to work from welfare. I add to that list those with learning disabilities. This would support job creation and reduce the benefits bill.
The third suggestion is to cut VAT to drive investment. The EU average VAT rate on hospitality is between 10% and 13%. Last week, Ireland announced that it would cut its rate to 9%, yet in the UK we still pay the full 20%, making it so much harder for people to support their local businesses. UKHospitality is calling for a cut on VAT to the EU average, which would pay for itself over the course of the Parliament with higher tax receipts.
As the noble Lord, Lord Watson, said, the social and community importance of bars and pubs cannot be overestimated. Pubs are the centre of our communities, yet increasingly, people are drinking at home because they can no longer afford the price of a pint. As one person in the business said to me, 1p off a pint was a very unfunny joke. Our duty on alcohol is the second highest in Europe, topped only by Finland’s. People need to meet face to face, to feel a sense of belonging and connection. Hospitality venues are not just in towns and cities but in rural communities. They are the heartbeat of those communities, as the noble Lord, Lord Watson said, but, frankly, they need resuscitation. The isolation that rural communities feel—particularly farming communities, which are under so much pressure at the moment—is a very real issue, and pubs in the country are closing at an alarming rate.
The Government should now recognise the importance of this sector for economic growth, wealth creation, responsible consumption, social integration, community connection and cultural richness, and throw their weight behind this industry. The British Beer and Pub Association has estimated that 375 pubs will close before the end of this year in England, Wales and Scotland. Our Prime Minister has said that he wants to
“bring the buzz back to Britain’s boozers”.
He has got that the wrong way round. Bring the boozers back, and perhaps the buzz will follow.
As I said at the beginning, I am in not in any way against this Bill, but giving pubs the ability to trade later will not be any help with all the issues they face. Many of them can no longer afford to open every day, let alone late at night.
Let me end with an extract from Jeremy Clarkson’s email:
“When you step into a pub that you are running, you immediately notice the broken light bulb and the wonky loo roll dispenser and the cockeyed picture. And as there’s no money in hospitality these days, you can’t afford to get someone in to put everything right. You must do it yourself. And then, while you are doing it, a food allergy enthusiast will claim they saw a potato which has made them go blind and then the guy who you employ to clean the lavatories after the pub shuts will phone in sick so you’ll have to do that too. It’s relentless. But … there will come a time when everyone sits down after work and has a drink and a sausage roll and all of a sudden it’ll make sense. And it’ll especially make sense for you because you’re doing it for a very good reason”.
That very good reason is why I am speaking on this subject today. We have called our pub the North Star, as we guide our candidates into work and are constantly there for them when they embark on their journeys into employment.
Meanwhile, I will fight as hard as I can to ensure that the hospitality business can thrive again, not just for our candidates and their prospects but for all of us in our communities. Pubs are a quintessential symbol of Britishness, and it is our patriotic duty to keep them open and affordable, both for those who run them and for those who drop in for a drink, a meal and a conversation. Above all, none of us wants to hear for a final time that always unpopular phrase, “Last orders, please.”
Lord Bailey of Paddington (Con)
My Lords, I welcome this Licensing Hours Extensions Bill. It is a sensible, straightforward change that will enable the public to support our hospitality sector with cross-party support. I hope it helps to mitigate the unnecessary strain put on local licensing authorities by preventing the current process of large numbers of applications being viewed at late notice, as well as giving certainty to businesses.
The hospitality sector helps to bring people together. As the co-chair of the loneliness APPG, I believe it is vital to enable and support our young people to socialise. The Covid-19 pandemic had an incredibly damaging impact on our young people’s well-being, with almost half of parents reporting that their children’s social and emotional skills worsened as a result. Furthermore, the hospitality sector is intertwined with the arts, with a trip to the theatre likely to include a drink and a meal out. The music, performing and visual arts sectors aid in cultural enrichment, bringing in over £11 billion to the UK economy each year, with our West End box office generating almost 1/10th of that. More broadly, hospitality brings in over £62 billion to the UK, providing 2.6 million jobs, making it the sixth-largest UK industry in terms of employment.
However, this Government’s track record does little to inspire confidence, actively undermining the sector since they came to office. Indeed, 111,000 jobs have been lost in the hospitality sector across the UK, with 30,000 jobs going here in London. It is hardly surprising that such a phenomenon is occurring when it now costs on average an extra £2,500 to add a member of staff, even before wages. In a nation that has a really high unemployment rate, surely we do not want to add more to this list.
Like other businesses across the UK, the hospitality sector has faced significant additional challenges since the Labour Government came to power. Each hospitality business has been expected to come up with an extra £30,000 to £80,000 in additional operating costs, according to the Night Time Industries Association. That staggering figure is the culmination of the national insurance contribution rate increases and an increase in the living wage of 6.7%, not to mention broader market instabilities and lack of confidence. These Government decisions not only make your night-time trip out more expensive but they make it less likely to happen at all. The night-time economy sector has faced a 15.8% contraction over the summer. The Times reported that a third of pubs, bars, restaurants and hotels are losing money and are at risk due to recent tax rises. These numbers reflect a growing understanding that a Labour Government are not conducive to business.
This predicament is even worse in our capital. The Mayor of London appointed Amy Lamé as a night czar. He paid her a huge sum of money, but she oversaw a massive decline in London nightlife which has yet to be put right. Economics aside, safety is a huge limiting factor, especially for women, on enjoying the hospitality sector. Two-thirds of respondents said they would be more likely to stay out later, and thus spend more money, if better night transportation was provided. I hope the Government will encourage the Mayor of London and TfL to put more effort into rolling out the Night Tube—for example, opening it up on Thursday, which has become the new Friday for many Londoners.
While I commend this Bill in its endeavours, I am deeply concerned by the challenges facing the hospitality sector due to the uncertain economic environment overseen by this Government, with business confidence falling to minus 74, the lowest reading since the survey began in 2016. As Michael Kill, the CEO of the Night Time Industries Association, put it:
“This past year has been a devastating chapter for the night time economy”.
The Government must do more than this Bill to help the night-time economy grow and prosper. They need to provide a pro-business environment, an agenda that will help this society rebuild not only the night-time economy but employment, particularly for young people. This is an area of our economy that gives many unskilled young people their start in employment and, without it, their lives will be destroyed before they even begin.
Lord Hayward (Con)
My Lords, I thank noble Lords for the opportunity to speak in the gap. I would like to make a few comments specifically in relation to this Bill.
I was previously the chief executive of the British Beer & Pub Association. I spent many a happy hour— or not—preparing, negotiating and discussing this particular piece of legislation with the Government at the time. I also brought the court case that resulted in the change in legislation, with the result that it was possible for people to drink at hours when the men’s football World Cup was taking place in Japan and South Korea.
As the noble Lord, Lord Watson, said, pubs are used on many occasions and in many different circumstances. I remember only too well having a conversation with him about the merits and demerits of moving the Greets Green and Lyng ward from one constituency in the Black Country to another. Boundaries may be resolved in some interesting places on occasions.
More seriously, this is an important piece of deregulatory legislation. It is a small step that I think is absolutely necessary. The problems that we have seen, in relation to the inability to bring forward changes in hours because Parliament is not sitting, have been highlighted on a number of occasions. This is a small but necessary deregulatory measure that is welcomed by the hospitality industry. I wish the Bill fair for the next few stages and contributions.
Lord Sandhurst (Con)
My Lords, it is a pleasure to speak in this debate. I begin by thanking the noble Lord, Lord Watson of Wyre Forest, who has sponsored this Bill and dedicated much time to ensuring its smooth progress. I am also grateful to all noble Lords who have contributed today. The noble Lords, Lord Hayward and Lord Bailey of Paddington, brought their experience of our hospitality sector, of local communities and of the workings of our licensing regime.
This sector needs all the help it can get: the Government’s misguided changes to national insurance have caused it needless damage. My noble friend Lady Monckton of Dallington Forest, who spoke so eloquently on such a precious subject, is working to open a pub that will employ people with disabilities. This commendable endeavour is testament to her long-standing support for the disabled. I hope that the Government will give a clear commitment to supporting pubs that may be affected by this legislation, particularly those that play an important role in empowering people with disabilities.
This Bill seeks to amend the Licensing Act 2003 in a modest but meaningful way by moving the statutory instrument under Section 172 so that orders to relax licensing hours for significant occasions may be made under the negative resolution procedure rather than the affirmative procedure. Although there is no need to make this discussion political, I believe that, at its heart, this is a Conservative-minded proposal. It is about removing bureaucracy, supporting local businesses and empowering communities to celebrate together. The Bill should have everyone’s support.
As other noble Lords have said, our hospitality sector is a vital part of local economies. Pubs, restaurants and other licensed premises are community hubs and meeting places. They anchor our high streets. They contribute to the social fabric of our towns and villages. They provide important employment opportunities to people of all ages, from students to the retired. As one honourable Member in the other place put it:
“Constituents … would welcome this relatively minor change so that they can come together, support their local hospitality spots and mark those occasions”.—[Official Report, Commons, 17/1/25; col. 663.]
This Bill will give businesses the flexibility that they need to respond when our country comes together, whether that be for a major sporting occasion, a local occasion or a royal occasion.
By removing an unnecessary layer of parliamentary procedure, this Bill will free up parliamentary time. It will not alter the substantive provisions for when extensions may be granted: rather, it will streamline the mechanism. That will give this House time to discuss other matters of national importance, so it is a double win.
Finally, the Bill promotes community celebration and social cohesion. Many of our treasured national moments, such as royal celebrations and major finals, lead communities to gather together in pubs and other licensed premises. The current process sometimes delays suitable responses, for example when Parliament is in recess. Enabling licensing hours to be extended in a timely, practical manner for these events will mean that we can better support our citizens who want to gather together. It will help communities bond.
Although we on these Benches warmly support the Bill’s principle and intend to lend it our backing, we recognise the need for proportionate safeguards and oversight, which the Bill upholds and provides. The Bill does not change the core test of what is of “exceptional significance”. The Secretary of State must still judge whether an extension is justified. This Bill still ensures democratic oversight through the prayer mechanism. It allows Parliament to object where necessary, but the Government must still plan ahead and consult the police and local authorities. As Ministers here and in the other place have noted, the police have generally supported such extensions and there has been no disproportionate rise in crime or disorder.
Overall, this Bill strikes a good balance. It supports business and community and it protects the importance of democratic oversight. We on these Benches want to enable and encourage enterprise to back our hospitality sector and strengthen local communities—and to do so without unnecessary red tape. This Bill is a timely and sensible measure, so we on these Benches welcome it. We support its passage. I look forward to this important step being taken so that, when our nation comes together in celebration, local venues can also do so in a safe manner and with minimum delay. I lend the Bill my support.
I end my speech today on a high note with a quotation from a fine old song, “The Beer-Drinking Briton”, written to a tune by Thomas Arne, the author of “Rule, Britannia!” It goes:
“Let us sing our own treasures, old England’s good cheer. To the profits and pleasures of stout British beer”.
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.
Lord Watson of Wyre Forest (Lab)
My Lords, this has been a good-natured, thoughtful and very convivial debate. I am grateful for all contributions made today.
The noble Baroness, Lady Monckton of Dallington Forest, and the noble Lord, Lord Bailey, made very thoughtful contributions about wider policies that could be adopted to support the hospitality sector. I am sure that the Front Bench heard that. Many of their contributions, I hope, will be considered in the other place when it comes to the Budget and policy ahead. I have one small piece of advice for the noble Baroness, Lady Monckton, on the opening of her pub, from my limited experience of running bars, clubs and festivals. Of the 69 million people who live in this country, the last person she should take advice from on how to change a light bulb is Jeremy Clarkson.
I should have known that the genesis of this Bill was in the mind of the noble Lord, Lord Hayward, because it is clear, proportionate and practical. I am grateful for his support today in a way that I was not grateful for the convincing arguments he made to the Electoral Commission for the removal of Greets Green and Lyng ward from my constituency in the boundary changes. That was a very important part of my life. None the less, I am grateful to him and to both Front Benches.