HC Deb 02 April 1913 vol 51 cc378-9
66. Mr. HARRY LAWSON

asked whether the total yield from on- and off-Licence Duties in Ireland in 1911–12 as against 1908–9 is only £14,337; and whether the duty for on-licence has risen only 18s. 8d.?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

As regards on-licences the figures given by the hon. Member are approximately correct. As I explained in the Debate on the last Finance Bill, the increase in the duty is bearing lightly on Ireland, because the large majority of the licensed houses are of a low annual value.

67. Mr. HARRY LAWSON

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether in his Estimates for 1909–10 he expected to receive from the on and off retail licence an increase of £1,500,000; and whether the actual balance of £442,207 is mainly derived from the taxation of the London licensed houses?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

I expected to receive £2,100,000 front the increase in the Liquor Licence Duties under the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910, and as I explained in debate on the Finance Bill last year, that agrees substantially with the amount I have received in respect of the increase for the year 1911–12. No pledge was given that the increase in respect of the "on" and "off" retail licences should not exceed £1,500,000. I cannot therefore attach any very definite meaning to the expression "the actual balance of £442,207."

68. Mr. HARRY LAWSON

asked whether the total yield of the retail on-Licence Duties within the city and county of London has increased from £204,581 for the year 1908–9 to £607,750 for the year 1911–12, the total increase being £403,169 and the rate 197 per cent.; whether this increase amounts to one-quarter of the total increase over the United Kingdom; whether, before the Finance Act of 1910, the yield in the London area was only one-ninth of the total yield; whether, if this proportion had been maintained, the increase would have been only £192,000; and whether, if the basis of population had been taken, the increased yield would be only £173,000?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

The figures given, which appear to be based on provisional figures given in the Return of Liquor Licence Duties (House of Commons Paper No. 217, of 1912), are approximately correct.