HC Deb 19 May 1933 vol 278 cc735-8

(1) If the Secretary of State is satisfied that any premises in the Carlisle State Management District in which he is carrying on, or is about to carry on, any business involving the sale or supply of intoxicating liquor fulfil the special qualifications for an hotel licence or a restaurant licence, he may by order direct that the provisions of subsections (1) and (3) of section four of this Act shall apply to the premises as if an hotel licence or a restaurant licence were in force in respect thereof. In this section the expression "the special qualifications for an hotel licence or a restaurant licence" means the special qualifications specified in subsections (2) to (4) of section one of this Act as set out with adaptations in the Schedule to this Act, and in relation to any premises in respect to which an order under this section is in force the reference in sub-section (3) of section four of this Act to the holder of the licence shall be construed as a reference to the person appointed by the Secretary of State to conduct the business carried on in the premises.

(2)If the Secretary of State is satisfied that any premises in which he carries on, or is about to carry on, business as afore said fulfil all the special qualifications for an hotel licence or a restaurant licence, except those specified in paragraph (c) of subsection (2), or, as the case may be, in paragraph (c) of sub-section (3) of the said section one as set out as aforesaid, he may by order direct that both sub-section (1) of section four of this Act, except paragraph (a) thereof, and sub-section (3) of that section shall apply to the premises as if an hotel licence or a restaurant licence were in force in respect thereof.

(3) An order under this section shall have effect for one year from the making thereof or such less period as may be specified in the order.

(4) Before deciding that any premises in which he is carrying on business fulfil the special qualifications specified in paragraph (c) of sub-section (2) or, as the case may be, paragraph (c) of sub-section (3) of the said section one as set out as aforesaid, the Secretary of State shall consult the Commissioners of Customs and Excise.— [The Solicitor-General.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

3.52 p.m.

The SOLICITOR GENERAL (Sir Boyd Merriman)

I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

The object of this new Clause is to extend the privileges of this Bill to houses that are included in the Carlisle State management scheme. The test for the inclusion among hotels which are entitled to hotel or restaurant endorsement is that the percentage of takings from drink does not exceed a certain proportion, a half in the case of hotels and three-fifths in the case of restaurants. The whole idea is to encourage those hotels and restaurants which go in for catering rather than for the mere sale of drink. The Carlisle State management scheme was also conceived with that very object. It was in order to get rid of certain difficuties which had arisen through the number of munition workers who were concentrated in a small district during the War, and out of that there has grown what may be called an experiment designed to show that hotels and restaurants can nourish on the lines which it is the object of this Bill to promote. Therefore, it would be manifestly absurd to exclude from the privileges of the Bill houses owned by the Secretary of State. It is necessary to have an Amendment for the purpose. This and the Amendment to the Schedule look very formidable, but in substance they are merely applying, in slightly different words, with the necessary adaptation, the wording of the Bill to the particular circumstances of the case.

Dr. SALTER

What at present is the ratio of takings in respect of food and non-intoxicating refreshments to the total takings in these places to which the Amendment is to apply?

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL

It would be impossible to answer that question with regard to all the hotels in Carlisle. All that the new Clause is designed to effect is that, if there is an hotel in the Carlisle district, it should be able to obtain the same privileges as hotels outside the Carlisle district provided that it can pass the test for an individual hotel. I cannot manifestly give any general figure for the whole of the Carlisle area, nor is it intended that this privilege should apply indiscriminately to all hotels in the Carlisle area. It is merely intended to apply to those hotels and restaurants—I understand about 20 out of some hundreds —which would be likely to qualify. It is necessary to have this Clause because under the State Management Scheme the Secretary of State is himself the licensing authority. The Bill only applies to on-licences obtained from justices. The hotels, restaurants and public houses in the Carlisle district do not have to go to the justices for their licences. They are not under the control of the licensing justices. Therefore, it is necessary to make provision for the cases which are not covered by the operative words of the Bill and to enable the Secretary of State, where he is satisfied that a particular house comes within the qualification which the Bill lays down, to apply to that house the privileges given by the Bill.

3.56.p.m.

Mr. ISAAC FOOT

I want to ask the learned Solicitor-General whether the proposals which are contained in the new Clause now put before the House are in consequence of the passing of the new Clause 5 in the Committee upstairs. There was a new Clause passed to include what I understand is called the wayside inn. Is it in consequence of the passing of that Clause that these provisions are now brought forward, because, if they apply generally to the Bill, why was not the subject brought forward upstairs? Was there any consideration of this matter by the Committee? Can the learned Solicitor-General give some guidance upon that question.

3.57.p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL

The answer to the question of the hon. Gentleman is that this Clause is not brought in only in consequence of the Clause to which he referred having been incorporated in the Bill in Committee. It is brought in because it was found that the provisions of the Bill as they passed the Committee would not have applied to the State managed hotels and restaurants in the Carlisle district because of the fact that licences in that district are not obtained from the justices. It is true that that particular Clause having been put into the Bill, the privileges of it are also enacted in the Clause which I am now moving. The Clause which I am moving has general application so that to those houses will attach the same privileges, whatever they may be, if their competitors in other parts of the country obtain them.

Mr. MORGAN JONES

I notice from the words on the Order Paper that the Clause is to apply to the Carlisle State management district. The Solicitor- General knows that there are two other districts beside the Carlisle area included in the control of State management. Does the Clause apply to those other areas?

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL

The hon. Member is referring to two districts in Scotland. The Bill does not apply to Scotland, and, therefore, it is not necessary to apply the provisions of the proposed Clause to those districts.

3.58 p.m.

Mr. FOOT

I thank the Solicitor-General for the explanation he has given. I had assumed, as the subject was not discussed upstairs, and as the matter was only brought forward, first of all, after the conclusion of the Committee stage, that it was really consequential upon the passing of Clause 5 towards the end of the Debate in Committee. I recognise that, if the proposals of the Bill are right and they should be accepted by this House, the same provision must be made for the Carlisle district. That scheme has been established for a good many years, and, whatever privilege may be enjoyed by the ordinary licensed house, ought to be enjoyed by the licensed houses in the Carlisle district. I—and I speak for those who like myself are very much, interested in this Measure— should not seek to raise any objection to the Clause being adopted. What I (had intended to do if we had been able to reach the Measure earlier in the day was to move the Adjournment of the Debate. That is not now necessary. I can only express my satisfaction that we have now a fuller opportunity of considering the Measure. The Measure is one which deals with a most important matter—

It being Four of the Clock, the Debate stood adjourned.

Debate to be resumed upon Monday next.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

Whereupon Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to Standing Order No. 3.

Adjourned at Two Minutes after Four o'Clock until Monday next, 22nd May.