HC Deb 24 June 1890 vol 345 cc1805-6
MR. T. PRY (Darlington)

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is correctly reported in this day's issue of the Times to have said to a deputation of licensed victuallers— That he gave them the strongest assurance that no part of the Local Taxation Bill was to he considered as abandoned, and that they might absolutely rely upon it that the money to be accumulated should never be devoted to any other purpose than the extinction of licences; and, if so, how far that statement agrees with the announcement he made in the House the same evening that the money would be at the future disposal of Parliament?

MR. D.CRAWFORD (Lanark, N. E.)

I have given the First Lord of the Trea- sury notice of a question on the same subject. The hon. Member for Darlington has read only a part of the reply given to the deputation by the right hon. Gentleman, but I think other parts of it should be read. The right hon. Gentleman is reported to have said also— That the Government had been driven by the opposition of their Liberal Unionist allies to the conclusion that they could not successfully resist the 10 years' limit Amendment, and that they had, therefore, decided to postpone certain clauses of the measure. Then he went on to say that— On the other hand, he gave the deputation the strongest assurance that no part of the Bill was to be considered as abandoned, and that they might rely upon it that the money to be accumulated should never be devoted to any other purpose than the extinction of licences: and this announcement, it was stated, was "received with applause."

MR. W. H. SMITH

In answer to the questions of the hon. Members, I have to say there is one portion of this report which is accurate, and that is that the proceedings were private. I can only say that the report is more or less inaccurate. I stated to the deputation all that I had said in the House a few minutes before, neither more nor less; and as every Gentleman in the House is in possession of that statement, I have given all the information I can.

MR. STOREY (Sunderland)

I desire to ask the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Treasury what were the precedents he referred to yesterday with regard to the leaving over of money for future use instead of its being appropriated in the Session?

MR. W. H. SMITH

I am not aware that I did refer to precedents, but I venture to say that the only answer that can be given on such a point must be given in Debate.