Clause 3 - Licensing authorities
Licensing Bill [Lords]
8:55 am
Mr Andrew Turner (Isle of Wight, Conservative)
I must confess that I like that argument. If the Government wish to maintain historic privileges and traditions, I am all for that. If the amendment were subjected to a Division, I would be happy to vote against my hon. Friend the Member for North-East Cambridgeshire who wants the removal of the two paragraphs. However, I support strongly his amendment No. 64 to include the university of Cambridge. We should undoubtedly maintain some of the historical privileges of that secondary institution, but why does the Minister propose the retention of some historical privileges and traditions but not others? What is wrong with the Universities (Wine Licences) Act 1743, for example? What do the Government so dislike about that Act to make them repeal its provisions in this Bill?
What is wrong with retaining the powers of the university of Cambridge? Is the Government's decision something to do with the cross-border nature of the university? Some of its colleges are outside the boundary of the city, therefore, exactly the same geographical considerations apply as to the Inner and Middle Temples. The university is a cross-boundary institution and it is not convenient for licensing power to rest with either one local authority in the more conventional meaning of that word, or another. Will the Minister explain?
I am happy to go down either the road of removing all historical privileges and traditions or of retaining them, although I would be happier to retain them. I cannot see why the Minister is riding two bicycles in opposite directions in this clause.