§ 41. Mr. CHARLES DUNCANasked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been called to the increase in the number of charges connected with drunkenness in 1912 as compared with previous years; whether he is aware of an increase from 89,937 in 1911 to 92,443 in 1912 in Scotland and an increase from 186,182 in 1911 to 197,936 in 1912 in England and Wales; whether any explanation can be given of this simultaneous increase all over the country during 1912, seeing that there had been a steady decline for a number of years; whether any orders, instructions, suggestions, or regulations have been 747 issued from the Home Office with reference to the deficit in the police pension funds and the loss of income to those funds from the decrease in the number of charges and the consequent loss of fines for offences under the Licensing Acts; and whether any of these fines, or any portion thereof, are paid to the police pension funds?
§ Mr. McKENNAI cannot answer for Scotland, but I am aware of the figures for England and Wales to which the hon. Member draws attention. The increase in proceedings and convictions for drunkenness in 1912 was a continuation, at practically the same rate, of the increase which the figures for 1911 had shown over those for 1910. The causes of the fluctuations in these figures are extremely difficult to assess. The matter is discussed from year to year in the Introduction to the annual volumes of Licensing Statistics, to which I would refer the hon. Member. No orders, instructions, suggestions, or regulations of the nature referred to in the question have been issued from the Home Office. Fines for offences under the Licensing Acts are generally paid to the police pension funds, but as any deficiency in a police pension fund is by law made good from the local rates, such fund is in no sense dependent upon the revenue from fines.
§ Mr. SNOWDENIs the increase spread over the whole country or is it confined to special areas?
§ Mr. McKENNAThat is a very interesting point. I could not answer without reference to the figures.
§ Mr. LEIF JONESIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that an increase in the pension fund follows an increase in the consumption of drink?
§ Mr. McKENNAI believe that is the case.
§ Mr. McKENNANo, it is not in the least dependent on the convictions for drunkenness.
§ Mr. CROFTIs it not a fact that increased convictions for drunkenness have synchronised with the decrease of public-houses under recent legislation?
§ Mr. McKENNAI should have to examine the figures in order to see whether increases have taken place in those districts where the number of public-houses has been reduced.
§ Mr. SNOWDENIs it not a fact, borne out by the licensing statistics, that there is no connection whatever between the number of convictions for drunkenness and the number of licences?
§ Mr. McKENNAI could not answer the question as broadly as it is put by my hon. Friend.