HC Deb 28 June 1944 vol 401 cc730-3

In section thirteen of the Finance Act 1942 (which provides for a five per cent. reduction of duty on publicans' licences in respect of the diminution in supplies of wines and spirits) for the words "five per cent." there shall be substituted the words "twenty-five per cent."—[Sir P. Hannon.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Sir Patrick Hannon (Birmingham, Moseley)

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

In this proposal I am asking the Chancellor to give some regard to those who supply spirits and wines. The Financial Secretary will recall that when the Finance Bill, 1942, was going through the House of Commons, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer made a concession of five per cent. to licensees of public houses in order to compensate them to some extent for—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speak up."] I am trying to speak as loudly as I can, so that Members can all hear me, in spite of the noise. We are now asking for a 25 per cent. concession of the licensee's duty, as the necessity for some relief is even more pressing now, than it was then, owing to 'the very great reduction that has taken place in the available supplies of spirits and wines for public-houses, and other places of entertainment. For instance, the supply of whisky is less than 50 per cent. of what it was when the former concession was given. I have had a number of letters from local licensed victuallers' associations, appealing in strong terms for a reconsideration of this question. In one letter, the President of the Welsh Federation of Licensed Victuallers makes a very strong case of the hardship which exists among licensees in Wales, because of the continued magnitude of the duty. When Sir Kingsley Wood was making the concessions in 1942, he said that the reduction of five per cent, which he conceded in the licence duties payable by publicans was all he was able to do, in the circumstances that were facing him at that time. I suggest that circumstances facing the Chancellor of the Exchequer to-day are very much more favourable than those which faced Sir Kingsley Wood, and I am certain the right hon. Gentleman will not wish to be a party to the continuance of unjust conditions among licensees everywhere in the country.

Throughout the war, the licensed traders have had a very difficult part to play in our social life, because of the increase in our Armed Forces, and the advent among us of American forces and forces from other countries The difficulties confronting a licensed trader become very acute occasionally, when he runs entirely out of wines and spirits. I hope that the Treasury will take account of these difficulties and give the licensed trader some consideration. The Financial Secretary knows how seriously the volume of trade has been reduced in licensed houses during the last few years. If the canons of taxation are to be observed, there should be justice all round, and the consideration for which we ask should be extended to the licensed trade. While I am not very hopeful that the Treasury are in a mood to make concessions to any part of the country, I see on the Government Front Bench my right hon. and gallant Friend the former Financial Secretary to the Treasury, looking with very careful and considerate attention at the proceedings on this Bill. I feel that if he were responsible for replying to this proposal, his kindly, generous and soft heart would impel him to do whatever he could for the licensed trade of the country.

Sir Irving Albery (Gravesend)

I beg to second the Motion.

From what my hon. Friend has said, it is clear that the Chancellor of the Exchequer recognised, in 1942, that some concession was due to licensees in this matter, and he appears also to have recognised that the concession he made was not adequate to do justice to the case. I notice a tendency on the part of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whenever he considers that, owing to altered circumstances, or actions that have been taken by private individuals, some deficiency occurs in the Revenue, to take drastic action to remedy the matter. We are glad that he does so, and we support him in seeing that the Exchequer obtains that which is its due. On the other hand, it appears to me to be clearly shown that if some injustice has been done to a class of taxpayers owing to the incidence of the war, the Chancellor of the Exchequer is not equally forthcoming. He seems to be 10th to alter legislation to put right grievances of taxpayers, in matters of that kind.

Sir William Wayland (Canterbury)

I support the Motion. I should like to point out that when we pay Income Tax we do so according to our incomes, but when the publican pays his licence duty, he has to pay the same amount as he paid prior to the war, despite the fact that the amount of stuff he is able to sell is considerably less. It is, therefore, just that the licence duty should be decreased. This matter has been before the House of Commons on many occasions, and on more than one occasion the Chancellor of the Exchequer has promised redress. A small redress was given, but I certainly think that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should still further, and considerably, reduce the duty. If the Ministry of Food had only accepted my proposal and had allowed more beer to be brewed, perhaps this proposal would not have been necessary.

The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Assheton)

The House is always very sorry, as I am, for any section of the community which has suffered in consequence of the war. Hon. Members are, naturally, just as sorry if it is a publican who has suffered, as if it is anybody else, but I would draw the attention of the House to the concessions that were made in the Finance Act, 1942. I doubt whether my hon. Friend the Member for Canterbury (Sir W. Wayland) has fully appre- ciated what those concessions really were. They were in two Sections of that Finance Act—Sections 13 and 14. Section 14 provides licence duty relief, in view of the general shortage of supplies and diminished trade, for all retail liquor licences. Except as regards the publican's licence, which is a composite licence to sell any liquor by retail, this relief is based on the trade done in each separate liquor, and applies to each separate licence. The amount of relief is two-thirds of the amount of the diminution in trade. As far as publicans are concerned, this relief is calculated on the trade in beer alone or, in Scotland, on the trade in spirits. It is at the same rate as for separate licences. This takes no account of the shortage of wines and spirits in public-houses, and a special relief of 5 per cent. for publicans was allowed by the other Section of the Act to which I have referred—Section 13. That was designed to give partial compensation for the loss of trade in wines and spirits.

I admit that this does not give full compensation in the circumstances. None the less, I think the House appreciates that we cannot always do what we would like to do, and we have to consider the revenue. The concession for which my hon. Friend asks would cost £600,000, and I am sorry to say that in view of that sum, my right hon. Friend does not feel able, in present circumstances, to make the concession.

Sir P. Hannon

Is it the policy of His Majesty's Government to continue an injustice in order to keep the revenue at a certain level?

Mr. Assheton

No, but His Majesty's Government made a concession, and they feel that it is as far as they can go at the present time; they cannot go any further.

Question, "That the Clause be read a Second time," put, and negatived.