text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  New Member - New Clause 1 - Purchase of tobacco on behalf of children
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  
  <p pid="a.80.4/1">I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.</p>
  
  <p pid="a.109.1/1"><i> Question The majority of MPs voted against considering a new clause for inclusion in the [http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2008-09/health.html Health Bill], which would have added a new offence into [http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1933/cukpga_19330012_en_2#pt1-pb1-l1g7 Section 7 (Sale of tobacco, &c. to persons under sixteen)] of the Children and Young Person's Act 1933, which said:[1]
  
  * A person commits an offence if he buys or attempts to buy tobacco on behalf of an individual aged under 18.
  * Where a person is charged with such an offence it is a defence that he had no reason to suspect that the individual was aged under 18.
  * A person guilty of such an offence is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale.
  
  The discussion was partly concerned with the fact that the government had -- on the day of this debate -- finally published some long awaited regulations on this matter and emailed them to members.[2]  
  
  These regulations are not on the web under [http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/dsi12-10 draft statutory instruments for 12 October].  These draft regulations were also not in the Library or the Vote office.[3]  And the emails containing the draft regulations, which were in answer to this proposed clause, were sent halfway through the debate.[4]
  
  This issue of regulations not being available even for a Parliamentary debate about them didn't make it into the press.[5]
  
  * [1] [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2009-10-12a.80.2 Mike Penning MP], House of Commons, 12 October 2009
  * [2] [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2009-10-12a.80.2#g84.2 Gillian Merron MP], House of Commons, 12 October 2009
  * [3] [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2009-10-12a.80.2#g87.0 Christopher Chope MP], House of Commons, 12 October 2009
  * [4] [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2009-10-12a.80.2#g92.0 Sandra Gidley MP], House of Commons, 12 October 2009
  * [5] [http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/oct/13/yesterday-in-parliament Yesterday in Parliament], The Guardian, 13 October 2009
  put, </i>That the clause be read a Second time.</p>
  
  <p pid="a.109.1/2"><i> The House divided:</i> Ayes 193, Noes 279.</p>
  
  
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  