NEW CLAUSE.—(Maximum Limit to Excise Licence Duty. 10 Edw. 7, c. 8.) (Hansard, 5 August 1912)

§ Mr. GRETTON
I put down this new Clause as a possible method of dealing with the grievance of the large licensed premises. The right hon. Gentleman in almost every speech he has made on the question of licensed duty has talked of the grievance under which expensive premises in large towns labour as compared with cheaper premises. I think it is agreed on all sides that under the New Scale of Licence Duties adopted in the Budget of 1909–10, towns like London, Manchester, Birmingham and others, suffer more than 2852 other parts of the country. The Committee will remember that the Budget fixed the tax upon the assessed annual value at one half of that assessment. The proposal in this Clause is that there should be a maximum limit placed on the amount of the tax. Before the Budget no Licence paid a higher tax than £60. Everyone admitted that that was too low a figure to cover all cases. This Clause proposes £250. I am not going to argue to-night that this proposal is in the best form or is the best proposal that might be made, but it is, at any rate, a practical way of relieving a grievance admitted on all sides. I therefore beg to propose the Clause that stands in my name. I will only put forward one argument, and that is that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when passing the Budget through the House of Commons stated that he thought that in a very few cases indeed would the tax amount to a greater sum than £250. In that way he made it clear that he did not contemplate charging more than £250 on licensed premises, except in very rare cases. The result is that owing to the great value of premises and their sites in many large towns, in a considerable number of cases, the figure goes beyond £250 and runs up to as high as £825 and £833. I think that is a very strong reason why the Chancellor of the Exchequer should consider this proposal, and I hope he will be able to give me a favourable reply, and will afford some relief where injustice has been done.

§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGE
I think the hon. Member moved a similar Clause last year.

§ Mr. GRETTON
Never before.

§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGE
At any rate, I am afraid I cannot possibly accept this Clause. The grievance of this particular class is that the licensee is taxed beyond the proportion of the trade he is making. I have no doubt there are cases of that kind, but taking them as a class, as a whole, I doubt whether they have a grievance. This, however, is a Clause which ought to be considered in connection with the re-valuation of licensed premises. To attempt to re-draft it in this way would simply be to create other grievances in connection with other classes of property.

§ Mr. GRETTON
I will not ask the House to divide on this Clause to-night. I will only say that the Chancellor of the 2853 Exchequer is entirely mistaken in the belief that, as a class, there is no grievance in this connection. The right hon. Gentleman is also mistaken in thinking that the valuation which is due to be made will remove this grievance. The method adopted in making the valuation has failed entirely in almost every instance to give any sensible relief from this overwhelming taxation in the case of licensed houses, which are valuable places entirely owing to their position being in the centre of a large town. I will, however, take another opportunity of pressing the matter upon the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and in the meantime I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Motion.