Richard,

Starting with your last point. Of course the local politicians are not the villains yet under this Act. However, I cannot help feeling that a large part of the controversy around this act arises from the local politicians record on the previous acts particualrly PEL. In many LAs the licensing was typified by extortionate fees and onerous conditions and the same people are expected by many to be equally officious under the new act.

As to the rest of the email. Ministers are very resistant to amendments, particularly in the commons where both sides concentrate on name-calling rather than constructive attempts to explore detail and produce an improved compromise. I see no benefit in spending a lot of time going over parliamentary processes of two years ago. However let me quote one example that did happen, which is the clause referring to Morris Dancing. It is oddly worded and may or may not have the exact effect that anyone wanted but it is an amendment which was accepted by all sides of the argument. What I cannot recall, and again see no benefit in investigating, is whether after the first adoption it was rewritten by the draftsmen and replaced as an uncontested further amendment but almost all amendments that do not originate with the draftsmen are.

The Lords is very different. Hardly any amendments are pressed to a vote indeed most are stated at the start to be "probing" amendments seeking verbal clarification from the minister and never intended to be voted. At the next stage the government often propose an amendment which makes improvements in that area, which is carried without debate. The other feature of the Lords handling of amendments which is surprising, is that they are often proposed purely to elicit a verbal clarification from the minister, which is then regarded by all sides as having sttled the issue. There is a caveat to that, in so far as I noticed it on a subsequent Education Bill in particular where the actual implementation is more easily subject to Government oversite than is licensing so it may not have occurred on the Licensing Act.