I am talking about the problem, not of motor cars but of motor vehicles—a little wider than motor cars but not as wide as the noble Lord seeks to draw me. I am not concerned with other things that the Act does. I am sure there are lots of bits of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 which work extremely well. What I cannot accept is the suggestion of my noble friend that it is not necessary. It is necessary for us to do something about litter. This is one thing we could do. It is a simple thing. It is an enabling power. It is a power which gives local authorities the opportunity, as my noble friend Lord Jenkin explained, to do what is being done in London. Therefore, it is wholly appropriate to the Bill. All too often one has found that the Government talk one thing and either do nothing or do something quite different. I would like to feel that this House will give a signal that it basically believes that something should be done and that something can be done. I beg leave to test the opinion of the House.
Division on Amendment 16
Contents 59; Not-Contents 140.
Amendment 16 disagreed.
Clause 50 : The EU financial sanctions to which Part 2 applies
Amendment 17
Moved by
Localism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Marlesford
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 31 October 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Localism Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
731 c1068 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-01-22 18:39:59 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_779707
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_779707
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_779707