Parliament Square (Management) Bill [HL]

I rise in the gap to reinforce what I said in the Chamber during proceedings on the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill. I say again that I greatly welcome the contents of this Bill. However, since I spoke, I received a letter from Councillor Colin Barrow, the leader of Westminster City Council, and I think that I should draw it to the attention of the House. He says, on behalf at Westminster City Council: "““The council has concerns over the current wording of the bill””—" that is, the government Bill. "““Our chief concern is that the protesters would simply move to other parts of the square, requiring further prolonged and costly legal action. Fundamentally, we do not believe that the Bill””—" that is, the government Bill— "““as it currently stands will deliver a solution to the problem once and for all, and we are concerned that it will be a further example of poor legislation in this sensitive area.""At the Commons Committee stage we proposed a series of amendments, which would ensure that the Square can be properly managed, whilst protecting people's democratic right to protest ... Unfortunately these were not adopted by the government in the Commons. However, I remain convinced that these amendments are vital to ensuring the safe and fair and management of the Square””." He then states: "““The Bill currently only affects the centre of the square, so protesters could simply decamp to the outer pavement””." On structures, he states: "““The Bill addresses structures which are designed for sleeping but would not provide for the removal of many of the structures which are already in the square and which are used for storage””." On the amplification of noise, he states: "““The Bill does seek to control loudspeakers, but does so in an overly convoluted way””." He then states: "““We believe that, if the Bill became law in its current form, protesters would simply move requiring further lengthy and costly legal action. The opportunity presented by the Bill to deal with the problem of anti-social behaviour in the Square finally and effectively should not be squandered””." In other words, the Government's Bill will not work, so we start with a blank piece of paper. Unless the Government can convince Westminster City Council that their proposals will succeed, they should stop what they propose in their Bill. That is why we have to take the Marlesford Bill very seriously. Westminster City Council is indicating that it supports the approach being taken by the noble Lord, Lord Marlesford. Why do Ministers not convene a meeting of Westminster City Council with Ministers in attendance, along with the noble Lord, Lord Marlesford, to discuss his Bill as an alternative way forward? I do not put that case to the Government in any political context; I just believe that we have to make the new system work. If Westminster City Council is convinced that it will not work, we may well end up making a dog's dinner of legislation and have to reconsider it all at some stage. I appeal to Ministers: please go back to the drawing board and consider this piece of prospective legislation very seriously.