2 April 2013 – Pedlars 2nd reply to consultation URN12/605
57 Pedlar stakeholders replied to the consultation on 15 March 2013.
click this link for the 1st reply
BIS extended the reply deadline to 5 April 2013 for secondary replies.
herewith pedlars.info 2nd reply:
2nd Reply to URN12/605 & 606 by pedlar stakeholders sent to BIS 2nd April 2013
This second reply is based on stakeholder exchanges resulting from BIS notification that the consultation deadline was extended to 5 April. A letter from Mr McGerr 28 March was responded to by pedlars.info. These communications outline the concerns that have been registered at pedlars.info and are herewith submitted to BIS for publication as a second separate formal response to the consultation URN12/605 & 606 as follows:
Dear Mr McGerr
You have responded to pedlars.info notification “pedlars alert 32” 23 March 2013 that can be found as an addendum at the bottom of this letter.
Thank you for your response to this latest extended deadline on the BIS URN (now 5 April).
The feedback at pedlars.info concurs with your succinct assessment of the BIS “so called” consultation.
There is general astonishment that civil servants who by their own admission are detached from reality are advising HMG on Option 1 “do nothing” or Option 2 “destroy a civil liberty”.
The consultation point of contact refuses to engage with genuine pedlars except on abhorrent terms of servile obedience to a pre-arranged agenda.
The BIS Briefing Paper reply that arrived after the 15 March deadline is no more than rhetorical repetition intent on avoidance/evasion/obfuscation.
BIS Onikosi informs pedlars.info that BIS has now closed ranks to include the minister and the Secretary of State and that pedlars have a 50/50 chance only of communicating with an anonymous Team BIS.
The issue of discrimination and malfeasance by Ms Onikosi in this consultation process remains outstanding.
–
Pedlars contend that these URNs do not constitute a “genuine consultation” for all and more of the reasons you have noted.
BIS has denied engagement in “principle” matters of law, constitution, interpretation, reality & common sense.
Pedlars have consistently revealed the problem of “wrong interpretation” at the root of all Parliamentary attempts to resolve street trading & pedlary law since 1966.
The dedicated website pedlars.info exposes the chronology of all communications since 2007.
The LGMPA did not resolve “perceived problems” in 1982.
The LLAA did not resolve “perceived problems” in 1994, 1998 or 2004.
Private Acts did not resolve “perceived problems” since 1999.
The closest HMG has got to resolving “perceived problems” was following Simon Casey’s Moreton’s Fork breakdown in Select Committee that lead to HL Paper 242 identifying the only “actual problem”.
Identifying “scale & proportion as the only legitimate problem” took Parliament…
• 46 years from abolition of the Hawkers Licence
• 30 years since regulating static street trading
• 13 years since the pedlary exemption was linguistically corrupted by Sharpe Pritchard/City of Westminster
• 6 years since BIS failed attempt to interpret the European Service Directive
–
BIS seeks a “national resolution” at a time when the UK is fragmenting into “nation fiefdoms” popularised by “localism” empowering “council fiefdoms” with private “enforcement fiefdoms”.
Regulating static street trading operation is a local authority legal obligation on ORRPI grounds of public safety caused by “licensed obstacles”.
HL found no grounds to regulate pedestrian traders/certified pedlars save for “size”.
HL confirms that LA’s have no remit to regulate pedestrians engaged in “private matters”.
Pedlary is and always has been a “private contract matter” re-acknowledged in HC by Rees-Mogg MP.
Private contract between 2 parties is no business of government or LA’s unless justified in the Public Interest.
BIS has not declared any objective that justifies HMG meddling in changes to Public Policy, Social Policy or Socio-economic freedom by pedlary.
–
Every attempt at pedlar prosecution in the last decade relies on “mis-interpretation of law” with the result that those who can afford a proper defence win and those who cannot loose.
Ten months ago pedlars proposed a national resolution of the “interpretation issue” within local Acts.
In hindsight pedlars realised that parliamentary protocol gags government opinion on LLAA and some15 other local private Acts.
Therefore one month ago pedlars updated the “Third Option” from “local” to “national” resolution to the following:
• that the Pedlars Act be the only suitable vehicle for national resolution of street trading & pedlary law
• that 6 qualifications to the Pedlars Act provide clarity on what constitute the lawful activities of pedlary
• that the Pedlars Act is made compatible with the Services Directive
• that local Acts, private Acts and the Pedlars Act are compatible forthwith
• that no further parliamentary time be wasted
• that 46 years of wrong interpretation can be ended
• that the General Interest will be served
download the full reply here