division_name: Fireworks Bill &#8212; Clause 10 &#8212; Training Courses
motion: <p class="" pid=".979.3/1" pwmotiontext="yes">I beg to move amendment No. 63, in page 6, line 10, leave out clause 10.</p>
  
  <p class="" pid=".979.3/2" pwmotiontext="yes">The amendment was inspired by the receipt late on Wednesday of the regulatory impact assessment on the Bill. The clause introduces a lot of regulation, requirements about training and so on. We probably know from our constituency postbags that some of these requirements impinge disproportionately on small businesses and shopkeepers&#8212;on the small business person, rather than the large multiple. If a butcher, for example, has to go on a training course, he has to find somebody else to run his shop. A little caf&#233; in Highcliffe in my constituency recently obtained a licence to sell alcohol with meals, and the proprietor is required to go on a training course. He needs no training in something like that&#8212;he is a fit and proper person for the task. The requirement to go on a training course means that he will have to close his caf&#233; or get someone in in his stead.</p>
  
  <p pid=".982.3/1" pwmotiontext="yes"><i>Question put,</i> That the amendment be made:&#8212;</p>
  
  <p pid=".982.3/2" pwmotiontext="yes"><i>The House divided:</i> Ayes 9, Noes 78.</p>