Cheltenham Borough Council (Markets) Bill Committee (Lords)
Thursday 9th July 2026
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
(began 3 weeks, 1 day ago)
Watch LiveSkip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
14:00
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
To the unopposed Bill Committee on the Cheltenham Borough Council Markets Bill. A bill promoted by Cheltenham Borough Council. I'm Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede senior deputy speaker. On my right is Mr. Che Diamond counsel. These proceedings are being broadcast and transcribed. The transcript will, as usual, be made available on the Parliament web pages in due course. May I begin by welcoming Mr. Emily Thomas?Pritchard LLP. And May. Our.
And parliamentary agent for the promoter. And may I ask you, Mr. Thomas, to introduce those with you and then to introduce the bill and describe its main provisions.
And parliamentary agent for the promoter. And may I ask you, Mr. Thomas, to introduce those with you and then to introduce the bill and describe its main provisions.
14:01
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Yes, my Lord, thank you for that introduction. I have with me, Mr. Louis Krog. Mr. Craig is the head of public protection at Cheltenham Borough Council, and he's also the officer responsible for the promotion of the bill. By way of background, Mr. Craig has more than 17 years experience of working in local government, and for most of that time he has specialised in licensing. I'm also accompanied by Sarah Farooqui, the head of law for litigation and planning at One Legal, which is the shared legal service that operates across four councils in Gloucestershire, including in Cheltenham and Miss Farooqui has over 25 years experience of working as a local government solicitor and has advised extensively on the operation of the 1852 act.
Thank you.
Thank you.
14:01
14:02
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I trust that you have in front of you the bundle of supporting evidence. Yes, I've got that right. Great. We'll be looking at certain of those documents shortly. Um, this afternoon. So I intend to do five things. Five brief things. First, I'm going to provide some background information about the problem caused by the statutory prohibition caused included in section 83 of the Cheltenham Improvement Act, which prohibits the holding of markets on the streets of Cheltenham.
Second, I'm going to describe the council solution for dealing with that problem. Third, I'm going to describe the interim solution that the council has been adopting to deal with it. And I'll also explain why that is not ideal. Fourth, I will summarise the bill's provisions and explain why they are needed. And fifth, I will touch on the support enjoyed by the bill. So first, some background information and I'll obviously begin with the legislative background. If we turn to page seven of the bundle that sets out section 83 of the Cheltenham Improvement Act 1852.
And there we can identify the difficulty that the statutory prohibition was designed to deal with. Um and there are some line markings in the margin, which I'm sure you'll notice. So section 83 refers to fairs, markets, mops and hirings being held on the high street, which at the time was used obviously by non-motorised vehicles and very busy with people. As the introductory wording to section 83 says, and other streets of Cheltenham, and that these events were causing a great nuisance, obstruction and inconvenience to those places, to the inhabitants of those places and to the public in general.
In Cheltenham. Owing to this, it was considered expedient that the nuisance, obstruction and inconvenience should be prevented and removed from the streets and places of Cheltenham, and then section 83 goes on to state that no person shall hold any fair market mop or hiring in upon, or about the High Street, or any other street within that borough. And so obviously, in effect then of section 83 is to prohibit markets on streets within the Borough of Cheltenham and by section 83. And this is the little line at the bottom.
It is also an offence to contravene this prohibition. It says that all persons who shall sell or expose for sale any goods, wares or merchandises, or any article or thing usually sold in a market in, upon or about the High Street, or any other street, shall forfeit for every such offence, any sum not exceeding £10. And so any person operating a market stall on the highway in Cheltenham would be committing a criminal offence under section 83. So there was a problem in the 1850s, and the 1850 act dealt with it.
However, the position today has changed and the council is keen for this legislation to catch up with life in the 21st century. So, for example, large parts of Cheltenham High Street along the promenade and other roads off the High Street are now pedestrianised, except when deliveries and collections take place at certain allocated times. This therefore presents a substantially different use of the town centre from what was happening in the mid 1980s, and is different from the harm and the nuisance that the 1852 act sought to address.
There used to be a problem, but there is a problem. No more. In fact, the prohibition is now the problem because the Council wishes to establish markets on the streets of Cheltenham. But the 1852 act obviously prevents it from doing so. So I'll next turn to the second point today, namely the council's solution to deal with the problem, namely the repeal of section 83 of the 1852 act and then the establishment and operation of markets under part three of the Food Act, 1984.
So obviously, without the prohibition, the Council would be in the same position as most other borough councils in England, in that they would be able to rely on part three of the Food Act, which provides the modern statutory framework for the establishment and operation of markets. But owing to the statutory prohibition, it cannot do so now. If we flick briefly to Tab four of the bundle um part three. Is. Set out there and I'll just go through some of the provisions quite quickly.
Um it comprises sections 50 to 51. And so these are important provisions. So on page 27 section 50 allows a borough council to establish a market within their area. Section 52 which is on um the following page, page 28 includes powers to appoint the days on which and the hours during which markets can be held, and section 53 allows the authority to demand charges in respect of the market. And then if we flick forward to section 60, which is on pages 31 and 32, that allows the authority to make market byelaws.
Um, the bylaws made under the Food Act can do four things. First, they regulate the use of the market place and the buildings and the stalls and the pens and everything else within that area. Second, they prevent nuisances or obstructions in the marketplace or in the immediate approaches to it. Third, they can regulate porters operating the market, but this is unlikely to be relevant to Cheltenham. And Fourth, after consulting the Fire and Rescue authority, they provide for preventing the spread of fires in the market.
Um, there are model byelaws which local authorities adopt, and these are published on the government website. And I should also mention that the procedural requirements relating to byelaws set out in sections 42 to 49 of the Markets and Fairs Clauses Act of 1847 would apply to any byelaw made under the Food Act, and the effect of that means that these include publicity requirements and also they would require the Secretary of State's approval before the byelaws were made. So before making any byelaws, um, the Council would take the byelaws to a meeting of its full committee.
And obviously they would have to have full due regard to the public sector equality duty and the provisions of the Equality Act 2010. So. The repeal of section 83 would allow the Council to operate markets under part three, which is specifically designed for that purpose. And that would be preferable to what is happening in Cheltenham today. And I now turn to the third point, which is the interim solution that the Council has been has been adopting to deal with the problem in.
2018, the council took advice from Council on, amongst other things, establishing street markets in Cheltenham. While the advice from Council stated that the prohibition contained in the 1852 act remained in force, it also advised that the Council could rely on its powers to authorise street trading pursuant to powers in the local Government Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1982, and that set out at Tab three, and the Council has proceeded to do so. The advice does not state that the Council can rely on the powers contained in part three of the Food Act, and, crucially, that is what the Council wants to do.
Um, now, if we just flick on to page 46 of the bundle. Um this. Shows the pedestrian pedestrianised areas that I mentioned a moment ago. And then the following three pages show those areas. So Suffolk Parade, Montpellier, Montpellier Arcade, and then the High Street in greater detail. And then if we go to the following pages, then we see photographs of what happens on those, um, on those streets. So the photographs on pages 50 to 54, so 50 shows what's described as Suffolk Sunday Market, 51 shows Cheltenham Farmers Market 52 refers to the Christmas market.
Also 53 and then 54 the vintage market. However, owing to the statutory prohibition. Which markets. The vintage. However, owing to the statutory prohibition, this is not technically correct because they are governed under street trading legislation and not the markets legislation market. Also 53 and then 54. The vintage market. So colloquially these street trading events are referred to as markets. However, owing to the statutory prohibition. This is not technically correct because they are governed under street trading legislation and not the markets legislation.
So while the 1982 act is helpful in that it allows street trading on the streets in Cheltenham, it is administratively burdensome for the council. So, for example, by relying on the 1982 act, each trader must obtain a separate street trading consent from the council, and this contrasts with the Food Act regime, where the council could license a single market holder who would then be responsible for licensing individual stallholders. The 1982 act regime places a burden on the council's licensing section, and this burden has increased in recent years.
So, for instance, if we look at the number of consents that have been issued over the last ten years, 12 consents were issued in 2017. Than 300 were issued in 2021. 22 and again in 2025. And more than 400 were issued in 2024. Individually consenting each trader as a street trader places a burden on the council's small team of officers, and that time could be spent dealing with application and the time spent dealing with applications for consent could be better spent on the other activities which fall within the licensing sections.
Statutory duties so things like taxi licensing, sex establishment, licensing, gambling, etc. so. So now, as part of the work under the 1982 Act regime, officers process information about each trader, including name and address, the National Insurance number, their date of birth, a description of the goods to be sold, details of the traders nominated assistance and they also obtain and collate information in respect of insurance and if, during the one year period for which the consent operates. If any of this information changes, then the database must be updated to reflect that change.
In addition to the burden on the council, the implications of operating under the 1982 act are also felt by the street traders themselves, because obviously they must provide this information in practice, the information is provided to an agent who collects it and then who then provides it to the council, and the council must then check and input it into their central system. Now the council has calculated that it takes, on average, just over an hour, and we say it's about 67 minutes to deal with each individual application. Mr.
Kroll can give additional detail about this, but if we, if the work is carried out at a notional hourly rate of just under £100 an hour, then dealing with the 409 stall applications that the council dealt with in 2024 would have cost the council more than £40,000. The council absorbs these costs. The council does get an income from market traders for the fee they must pay when they apply for a licence, but this amounts to around £17,000 per year, so the council is currently operating this area at a loss of £23,000 a year.
And um, obviously this is not sustainable. If the council could rely on the Food Act regime, then the council could potentially deal with a single operator who could be responsible for operating the market. The council would then be provided with a single set of supporting documents in respect of that operator and. We know that outside of Cheltenham, market operators are often awarded contracts that last for more than more than a year, for 3 to 5 years to operate the market, for instance. And so it therefore follows that the administrative burden on the Council would be significantly reduced if the Food Act regime were followed, instead of the 1982 act regime.
Um, I'll now turn to my fourth point and summarise the bill's provisions. The bill is set out at Tab six. It is um, unamended since its introduction and no amendments are proposed to it today. So clause one on page 42 gives the short title of the bill and provides for the date in which the bill, if enacted, would come into force. Clause two defines expressions used in the Bill and clause three then repeals section 83 of the 1852 act. If the council subsequently chooses to make byelaws under the Food Act, and those byelaws are confirmed by the Secretary of State, then clause four would come into play because it provides a power to issue a fixed penalty notice for a breach of those byelaws.
In subsections 3 to 5, set out the requirements as to the content and method of service of the notice. Subsection six provides that no proceedings may be taken within 14 days of the notice being issued, and if the person cannot be convicted of an offence, if the penalty is paid before the end of that period in subsection seven, um, which is on page 44, provides that the amount of the fixed penalty notice is to be prescribed by the council, but it may not be more than an amount exceeding level one on the standard scale, i.e.
up to £200, and then subsection eight prescribes the form of evidence applicable to any subsequent legal proceedings. And this provision is precedented in section eight of the Norwich Livestock Market Act 2025, which is also included in the bundle, and so the provision is necessary to ensure there are controls over the use of any market to enable the market to operate effectively and without clause four, the ability to manage the safe and efficient functioning of the market would be compromised. Clause five is on page 44, and it enables an authorised person, and this includes a constable or a person authorised by the council to require a person suspected of acting in breach of byelaws made by the Food Act to give their name and address so that enforcement action may be taken.
And subsection two provides that it's an offence to fail without reasonable excuse to provide that information, and a person who, without reasonable excuse, fails to provide the information, commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level three on the standard scale, and that's up to £1,000. And again, this clause is precedented in section nine of the Norwich Livestock Market Act 2025. And again, that's included in the bundle at page 39. And this provision is necessary for the purposes of including an effective enforcement regime in the bill.
My fifth and final point concerns support for the bill. The bill is supported by officers and members, and the latter have twice voted overwhelmingly in support of the bill. No petitions have been deposited, have been deposited against it. No concerns have been raised by MPs or peers. Last summer, the council consulted on its proposals. Of those who responded, 77% confirmed they were in favor of repealing section 83 and 81% confirmed they're in favour of adopting new byelaws. Gloucestershire County Council, which is the local highway authority, said they supported the general principle of the most appropriate legislation for modern market good practice.
Once the bill had been deposited, I wrote to the county council enclosing a copy of the bill and asked if they had any concerns with it. They confirmed they did not, and similarly, Tewkesbury Council have confirmed to Mr. Krog and Miss Farooqi that they are content with the bill as well. No concerns have been raised by the police or existing traders, or indeed by anyone else, and none of this is surprising to the Council. So in conclusion, street trading plays an important role in the cultural life of Cheltenham, making a substantial contribution to its economic growth, helping to drive footfall to the high Street and elsewhere in the town and benefiting the town's wellbeing.
The Bill is essentially a tidying up bill. It seeks to repeal a provision which has served its purpose, and whose existence compromises the council's ability to establish and operate markets in its area in the most efficient way, and in the way in which markets can be operated elsewhere in England. Thank you for your attention. And Mr. Croghan. I would be happy to answer any questions you might have, my Lord.
Second, I'm going to describe the council solution for dealing with that problem. Third, I'm going to describe the interim solution that the council has been adopting to deal with it. And I'll also explain why that is not ideal. Fourth, I will summarise the bill's provisions and explain why they are needed. And fifth, I will touch on the support enjoyed by the bill. So first, some background information and I'll obviously begin with the legislative background. If we turn to page seven of the bundle that sets out section 83 of the Cheltenham Improvement Act 1852.
And there we can identify the difficulty that the statutory prohibition was designed to deal with. Um and there are some line markings in the margin, which I'm sure you'll notice. So section 83 refers to fairs, markets, mops and hirings being held on the high street, which at the time was used obviously by non-motorised vehicles and very busy with people. As the introductory wording to section 83 says, and other streets of Cheltenham, and that these events were causing a great nuisance, obstruction and inconvenience to those places, to the inhabitants of those places and to the public in general.
In Cheltenham. Owing to this, it was considered expedient that the nuisance, obstruction and inconvenience should be prevented and removed from the streets and places of Cheltenham, and then section 83 goes on to state that no person shall hold any fair market mop or hiring in upon, or about the High Street, or any other street within that borough. And so obviously, in effect then of section 83 is to prohibit markets on streets within the Borough of Cheltenham and by section 83. And this is the little line at the bottom.
It is also an offence to contravene this prohibition. It says that all persons who shall sell or expose for sale any goods, wares or merchandises, or any article or thing usually sold in a market in, upon or about the High Street, or any other street, shall forfeit for every such offence, any sum not exceeding £10. And so any person operating a market stall on the highway in Cheltenham would be committing a criminal offence under section 83. So there was a problem in the 1850s, and the 1850 act dealt with it.
However, the position today has changed and the council is keen for this legislation to catch up with life in the 21st century. So, for example, large parts of Cheltenham High Street along the promenade and other roads off the High Street are now pedestrianised, except when deliveries and collections take place at certain allocated times. This therefore presents a substantially different use of the town centre from what was happening in the mid 1980s, and is different from the harm and the nuisance that the 1852 act sought to address.
There used to be a problem, but there is a problem. No more. In fact, the prohibition is now the problem because the Council wishes to establish markets on the streets of Cheltenham. But the 1852 act obviously prevents it from doing so. So I'll next turn to the second point today, namely the council's solution to deal with the problem, namely the repeal of section 83 of the 1852 act and then the establishment and operation of markets under part three of the Food Act, 1984.
So obviously, without the prohibition, the Council would be in the same position as most other borough councils in England, in that they would be able to rely on part three of the Food Act, which provides the modern statutory framework for the establishment and operation of markets. But owing to the statutory prohibition, it cannot do so now. If we flick briefly to Tab four of the bundle um part three. Is. Set out there and I'll just go through some of the provisions quite quickly.
Um it comprises sections 50 to 51. And so these are important provisions. So on page 27 section 50 allows a borough council to establish a market within their area. Section 52 which is on um the following page, page 28 includes powers to appoint the days on which and the hours during which markets can be held, and section 53 allows the authority to demand charges in respect of the market. And then if we flick forward to section 60, which is on pages 31 and 32, that allows the authority to make market byelaws.
Um, the bylaws made under the Food Act can do four things. First, they regulate the use of the market place and the buildings and the stalls and the pens and everything else within that area. Second, they prevent nuisances or obstructions in the marketplace or in the immediate approaches to it. Third, they can regulate porters operating the market, but this is unlikely to be relevant to Cheltenham. And Fourth, after consulting the Fire and Rescue authority, they provide for preventing the spread of fires in the market.
Um, there are model byelaws which local authorities adopt, and these are published on the government website. And I should also mention that the procedural requirements relating to byelaws set out in sections 42 to 49 of the Markets and Fairs Clauses Act of 1847 would apply to any byelaw made under the Food Act, and the effect of that means that these include publicity requirements and also they would require the Secretary of State's approval before the byelaws were made. So before making any byelaws, um, the Council would take the byelaws to a meeting of its full committee.
And obviously they would have to have full due regard to the public sector equality duty and the provisions of the Equality Act 2010. So. The repeal of section 83 would allow the Council to operate markets under part three, which is specifically designed for that purpose. And that would be preferable to what is happening in Cheltenham today. And I now turn to the third point, which is the interim solution that the Council has been has been adopting to deal with the problem in.
2018, the council took advice from Council on, amongst other things, establishing street markets in Cheltenham. While the advice from Council stated that the prohibition contained in the 1852 act remained in force, it also advised that the Council could rely on its powers to authorise street trading pursuant to powers in the local Government Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1982, and that set out at Tab three, and the Council has proceeded to do so. The advice does not state that the Council can rely on the powers contained in part three of the Food Act, and, crucially, that is what the Council wants to do.
Um, now, if we just flick on to page 46 of the bundle. Um this. Shows the pedestrian pedestrianised areas that I mentioned a moment ago. And then the following three pages show those areas. So Suffolk Parade, Montpellier, Montpellier Arcade, and then the High Street in greater detail. And then if we go to the following pages, then we see photographs of what happens on those, um, on those streets. So the photographs on pages 50 to 54, so 50 shows what's described as Suffolk Sunday Market, 51 shows Cheltenham Farmers Market 52 refers to the Christmas market.
Also 53 and then 54 the vintage market. However, owing to the statutory prohibition. Which markets. The vintage. However, owing to the statutory prohibition, this is not technically correct because they are governed under street trading legislation and not the markets legislation market. Also 53 and then 54. The vintage market. So colloquially these street trading events are referred to as markets. However, owing to the statutory prohibition. This is not technically correct because they are governed under street trading legislation and not the markets legislation.
So while the 1982 act is helpful in that it allows street trading on the streets in Cheltenham, it is administratively burdensome for the council. So, for example, by relying on the 1982 act, each trader must obtain a separate street trading consent from the council, and this contrasts with the Food Act regime, where the council could license a single market holder who would then be responsible for licensing individual stallholders. The 1982 act regime places a burden on the council's licensing section, and this burden has increased in recent years.
So, for instance, if we look at the number of consents that have been issued over the last ten years, 12 consents were issued in 2017. Than 300 were issued in 2021. 22 and again in 2025. And more than 400 were issued in 2024. Individually consenting each trader as a street trader places a burden on the council's small team of officers, and that time could be spent dealing with application and the time spent dealing with applications for consent could be better spent on the other activities which fall within the licensing sections.
Statutory duties so things like taxi licensing, sex establishment, licensing, gambling, etc. so. So now, as part of the work under the 1982 Act regime, officers process information about each trader, including name and address, the National Insurance number, their date of birth, a description of the goods to be sold, details of the traders nominated assistance and they also obtain and collate information in respect of insurance and if, during the one year period for which the consent operates. If any of this information changes, then the database must be updated to reflect that change.
In addition to the burden on the council, the implications of operating under the 1982 act are also felt by the street traders themselves, because obviously they must provide this information in practice, the information is provided to an agent who collects it and then who then provides it to the council, and the council must then check and input it into their central system. Now the council has calculated that it takes, on average, just over an hour, and we say it's about 67 minutes to deal with each individual application. Mr.
Kroll can give additional detail about this, but if we, if the work is carried out at a notional hourly rate of just under £100 an hour, then dealing with the 409 stall applications that the council dealt with in 2024 would have cost the council more than £40,000. The council absorbs these costs. The council does get an income from market traders for the fee they must pay when they apply for a licence, but this amounts to around £17,000 per year, so the council is currently operating this area at a loss of £23,000 a year.
And um, obviously this is not sustainable. If the council could rely on the Food Act regime, then the council could potentially deal with a single operator who could be responsible for operating the market. The council would then be provided with a single set of supporting documents in respect of that operator and. We know that outside of Cheltenham, market operators are often awarded contracts that last for more than more than a year, for 3 to 5 years to operate the market, for instance. And so it therefore follows that the administrative burden on the Council would be significantly reduced if the Food Act regime were followed, instead of the 1982 act regime.
Um, I'll now turn to my fourth point and summarise the bill's provisions. The bill is set out at Tab six. It is um, unamended since its introduction and no amendments are proposed to it today. So clause one on page 42 gives the short title of the bill and provides for the date in which the bill, if enacted, would come into force. Clause two defines expressions used in the Bill and clause three then repeals section 83 of the 1852 act. If the council subsequently chooses to make byelaws under the Food Act, and those byelaws are confirmed by the Secretary of State, then clause four would come into play because it provides a power to issue a fixed penalty notice for a breach of those byelaws.
In subsections 3 to 5, set out the requirements as to the content and method of service of the notice. Subsection six provides that no proceedings may be taken within 14 days of the notice being issued, and if the person cannot be convicted of an offence, if the penalty is paid before the end of that period in subsection seven, um, which is on page 44, provides that the amount of the fixed penalty notice is to be prescribed by the council, but it may not be more than an amount exceeding level one on the standard scale, i.e.
up to £200, and then subsection eight prescribes the form of evidence applicable to any subsequent legal proceedings. And this provision is precedented in section eight of the Norwich Livestock Market Act 2025, which is also included in the bundle, and so the provision is necessary to ensure there are controls over the use of any market to enable the market to operate effectively and without clause four, the ability to manage the safe and efficient functioning of the market would be compromised. Clause five is on page 44, and it enables an authorised person, and this includes a constable or a person authorised by the council to require a person suspected of acting in breach of byelaws made by the Food Act to give their name and address so that enforcement action may be taken.
And subsection two provides that it's an offence to fail without reasonable excuse to provide that information, and a person who, without reasonable excuse, fails to provide the information, commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level three on the standard scale, and that's up to £1,000. And again, this clause is precedented in section nine of the Norwich Livestock Market Act 2025. And again, that's included in the bundle at page 39. And this provision is necessary for the purposes of including an effective enforcement regime in the bill.
My fifth and final point concerns support for the bill. The bill is supported by officers and members, and the latter have twice voted overwhelmingly in support of the bill. No petitions have been deposited, have been deposited against it. No concerns have been raised by MPs or peers. Last summer, the council consulted on its proposals. Of those who responded, 77% confirmed they were in favor of repealing section 83 and 81% confirmed they're in favour of adopting new byelaws. Gloucestershire County Council, which is the local highway authority, said they supported the general principle of the most appropriate legislation for modern market good practice.
Once the bill had been deposited, I wrote to the county council enclosing a copy of the bill and asked if they had any concerns with it. They confirmed they did not, and similarly, Tewkesbury Council have confirmed to Mr. Krog and Miss Farooqi that they are content with the bill as well. No concerns have been raised by the police or existing traders, or indeed by anyone else, and none of this is surprising to the Council. So in conclusion, street trading plays an important role in the cultural life of Cheltenham, making a substantial contribution to its economic growth, helping to drive footfall to the high Street and elsewhere in the town and benefiting the town's wellbeing.
The Bill is essentially a tidying up bill. It seeks to repeal a provision which has served its purpose, and whose existence compromises the council's ability to establish and operate markets in its area in the most efficient way, and in the way in which markets can be operated elsewhere in England. Thank you for your attention. And Mr. Croghan. I would be happy to answer any questions you might have, my Lord.
14:20
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Thank you, Mr. Thomas. Um, you've actually answered some of my questions because you've itemised very well the amount of money which you would potentially or the council would potentially save. Um, if this, bill were to become an act. There is one matter, though, which I wanted to ask you about. You said of the people consulted um of the. 91 persons who responded. 77% were in favour of the repeal and 81% were in favour of adopting new bylaws for the management of the markets, of the people who dissented and didn't were.
There any particular themes of the people who dissented with the proposal?
There any particular themes of the people who dissented with the proposal?
14:21
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Not everyone who dissented said much more than no. Um, the council collected a table of the of the of the responses that were received, but it was more a case of wanting additional information as to what the future regime will look like post repeal and the way that information would be provided, of course, is that the council, assuming the bill goes through and the provisions are enacted, the Council have to develop a markets policy in order to run its market, and all of that information would be set out in that policy.
That market policy would be consulted on by the traders will be consulted, the market users will be consulted, interested persons will be consulted, and it will then be subject to approval by full Council of Cheltenham Borough Council.
That market policy would be consulted on by the traders will be consulted, the market users will be consulted, interested persons will be consulted, and it will then be subject to approval by full Council of Cheltenham Borough Council.
14:21
14:22
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
But there was no one, for instance, who said we were looking at the comments that they were in favour of retaining the 1982 act or anything like that. Right. Um and other comments that were made were um comments in terms of and which we counted as a no were comments in terms of things about the material being sold on the stalls, saying we don't like the tat that sold. Obviously that's a question of taste. There's one answer. One man's tat is another man's treasure.
But um, but that was the kind. So there was no overwhelming theme, but the. Think is a snapshot of the of the responses received.
But um, but that was the kind. So there was no overwhelming theme, but the. Think is a snapshot of the of the responses received.
14:22
14:23
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
The Christmas market has got a large food, a food offer. We set up in the middle of the. The pedestrian promenade with benches and tables and chairs. Um and the we uh, not this year. They haven't applied this year, but we have a big, um, international food market as well on in the same location. Um, so there is a food office, not a substantive part of the market offer, but we do have food markets. Yes.
If you look at page 53, in the bottom right hand corner, you'll see there's a Santa's helper, uh, attending to. Some sausages. Oh, that's a. Sorry, my lord. We also have a farmers market every other Friday that sells local produce. Yeah.
If you look at page 53, in the bottom right hand corner, you'll see there's a Santa's helper, uh, attending to. Some sausages. Oh, that's a. Sorry, my lord. We also have a farmers market every other Friday that sells local produce. Yeah.
14:24
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Okay. And what's I mean, it sounded like from what you've just said, it sounded like the people who are. Were just saying no. It may well be that they were uncertain about the future and the consultation which you were saying would be happening. What would be the timescale for the next stage, if I can put it like that, of if this bill were to become an act.
14:24
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
The bill would come into force within two months of it becoming an act. Right. Um, and the council is already working on a draft markets policy, as you would expect it to in preparation for, um, in the hope that the bill does become an act. But in terms of next steps, I think Mr. Crock is probably best placed to give a likely timeline. Yeah. Um, there's a number of statutory things we need to do, including adopting bylaws. So there'll be some statutory processes we would need to follow in terms of the policy.
Um as Mr. Thomas said, we are in the process of, of starting to think about our policy, um how we would establish markets, what mechanism, you know, would it be through a procurement exercise?Would it be through just designated spaces?So we're just starting to think about what that policy would look like. Once we get to that stage, we would undertake a public consultation probably for 12, 12 weeks in line with Cabinet Office. Um, recommendations. Uh, and then that will come back to cabinet probably, and then to, to council for further scrutiny and debate before it's adopted.
Uh, we don't anticipate this will come in assuming the bill receives royal assent until early next year at the earliest. Um, to follow the various democracy processes and timescales for consultation.
Um as Mr. Thomas said, we are in the process of, of starting to think about our policy, um how we would establish markets, what mechanism, you know, would it be through a procurement exercise?Would it be through just designated spaces?So we're just starting to think about what that policy would look like. Once we get to that stage, we would undertake a public consultation probably for 12, 12 weeks in line with Cabinet Office. Um, recommendations. Uh, and then that will come back to cabinet probably, and then to, to council for further scrutiny and debate before it's adopted.
Uh, we don't anticipate this will come in assuming the bill receives royal assent until early next year at the earliest. Um, to follow the various democracy processes and timescales for consultation.
14:26
14:26
14:26
14:27
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Yes. The main market operator operate markets in Worcester, in bath in Gloucester Keys and Cotswold towns. They are based in the Cotswolds. So they operate lots of markets in Cotswolds and of course Cheltenham. Um, so we do have a main market operator um that runs the majority of the markets we offer. But there are small operators that. But yeah, we do have well-established long serving market operators that we have a very good relationship with already.
14:27
14:27
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Um, thank you. So my understanding is that. Responsibility for licensing the individual traders under the system that you'd like to, to move to would be entirely a matter for the, the persons that that operating that you wish to operate the market, the market operators. So I just wanted to clarify, is it right then that the Council would have no role in, in licensing those individual traders?The Council's role would be strictly limited to licensing those persons who will operate the markets. Then the operators will be responsible for all the licensing.
That's correct. Thank you. All right.
That's correct. Thank you. All right.
14:28
14:28
14:28
14:29
14:30
14:30
14:30