London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Bill

I am grateful to Members of the Committee who have contributed to the debate. It is a serious matter to change the words. It is inconceivable that the Secretary of State would do so without consultation with the advertising industry. Let us be clear, the words appear because the IOC approved of Sydney, with the approach of the Olympic Games, constructing such a list. We are following that example. We know that it meets with the approval of the IOC, which regards it as important protection. Secondly, in the development of the games and in its work, LOGOC’s relationship with the advertising industry will be extremely close. Given that the advertising industry will be closely involved with the work of LOGOC and LOGOC dependent on a great deal of its operations, it is inconceivable that there will be a significant change to the words without any consultation. That is why there was not the slightest hesitation by the Minister in the other place, on behalf of the Government, that such consultation would be carried out before changes are made. I am only too happy to reiterate that point today. The Government do not believe that a statutory consultation period is needed in circumstances where LOGOC and the industry will be working in partnership in developing the games. It is absurd to think that suddenly, without forewarning, a structural change to the Act, as it would then be, would be imposed on the industry as regards these words. I understand the anxiety and that the industry feels it has the right to be consulted on such an important issue. We recognise that right. We do not believe that LOGOC can do its work without gaining the confidence of the advertising industry and it is therefore inconceivable that changes would be effective without consultation. That is why we believe that we do not need to put consultation on the face of the Bill. It is axiomatic that that process is bound to work.