your liberty and freedom is the subject of government consultation - don't let them confuse you  - inform yourself


Many fellow pedlars have written to thank us and some have asked how they can contribute to support our voluntary efforts. While our intent is to make information freely available, we do have expenses and welcome any support. Thanks!



9 July 2014 - Parliamentary Question - Ministerial answer misleads Parliament PDF Print E-mail



Pedlars criticise minister Jo Swinson for misleading Parliament in Written Reply to Written Question by Dan Byles MP.


Parliamentary Written Question:

Dan Byles(North Warwickshire, Conservative)

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what plans he has to (a) amend or repeal the Pedlars Acts 1871 and 1881 and (b) amend Schedule 4 to the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 covering the street trading regime of England and Wales; and if he will make a statement.

Parliamentary Written Reply:

Jo Swinson(East Dunbartonshire, Liberal Democrat)

The original Street trading and pedlary consultation was issued in November 2012 and covered the repeal of the Pedlars Acts 1871 and 1881 and other, incidental changes to the Local Government and Miscellaneous Provisions Act to ensure compliance with the EU Services Directive 2006/123/EC. The consultation had been extended in order for the Government to engage further with the UK’s pedlar community and closed in April 2013. We hope to issue a response by the end of the summer.


email from to minister Jo Swinson follows:


Dear Ms Swinson

RE: 7th July Parliamentary Questions:

Dan Byles MP raised a serious business/public question and your reply is misleading for the following reasons:

1  The original Street Trading & Pedlary Consultation to gather evidence was raised in 2009 and not in 2012 as misleadingly stated.

2  The second was raised in 2009 under URN09/1074 concerning modernisation.

3  The 3rd was in 2011 under URN11/542 concerning modernisation.

4  High-level stakeholders most directly affected submitted the "Third Option" first edition June 2012 (updated Jan 2013) to counter discussions to "repeal" or to "do nothing".

5  The 4th was November 2012 under URN12/605&606 concerning the effect of the European Services Directive and you are well aware that your department has consistently failed to engage with the pedlar community and has already caused grave legislative mischief for some descriptions of pedlar in spite of warning at Grand Committee and others in BIS by those affected.

Your statement to the House is therefore misleading and needs be withdrawn forthwith. 

6   Stakeholder pedlars contend that your department BIS has at all levels from the Permanent Secretary to the Consultation appointed Points of Contact adopted what has been exposed as a "policy to ignore" and this includes your as Minister, the SoS and the Chair of the BIS Committee in Parliament as not a single response or acknowledgment has been forthcoming.

7  The reference to "incidental changes to the LG(MP)A" is also considered misleading because the proposed substantive changes include repeal of the Civil Statute (Pedlars Act) without public consultation/scrutiny/impact nor consideration of the viable proposed Third Option submitted by high-level stakeholders to resolve all Street Trading and Pedlary anomalies. 

BIS proposed legislation includes the automatic offence of "trading without a consent or licence in a designated street" that catches all pedlars and an option for a local authority to discriminate against UK pedlars in preference to other EEA State persons. 

Essentially BIS has proposed to introduce regulation of pedlary via a back-door route within street trading regulation against its own undertaking not to do so.

8  You will be aware that the remit of BIS to meddle in civil law has been challenged at the highest level with the Permanent Secretary for BIS but no response has yet been received.

9   You will also be aware that the House of Commons Library Note author has been rebuked by stakeholders for the potential to mislead Parliament on the subject by failing at the outset to differentiate the Principle difference between Pedlary and Regulated Street Trading emphasising only BIS policy with no mention of the 200 and more articles at

Your response awaited.


Yours sincerely

Robert Campbell-Lloyd

Roll B Parliamentary Agent

administrator at

cc Dan Byles MP



My Evil Trade - Link to video








Advice on Court Hearings

Pedlars are advised to Appeal any and all convictions - ask for help

twitter what's happening today and include #pedlary

connect via facebook