London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Bill

Before my noble friend sits down, and with the permission of the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, may I ask a question that does not discuss the merits of the amendment as distinct from withdrawing it or, if we were voting on it, voting it down? Would not all this concern about ambush marketing, which is a very real and justified concern, be less loaded if we did not have paragraph 3 of Schedule 4? Everything else—especially paragraph 2, which makes quite clear what ambush marketing is—and the provisions in paragraph 4 onwards about authorised use and so on, would be there, but we would not have the loaded presumption in paragraph 3—I am not using any words that my noble friend does not like—if paragraph 3 was not there.