HC Deb 24 March 1948 vol 448 cc3305-12

8.17 a.m.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Simmons.]

Mr. Niall Macpherson (Dumfries)

Perhaps I should first apologise for raising this matter at this time. [HON. MEMBERS: "The day is young."] It is appropriate that the subject I am raising has to do with the hours of closure under State management. This is not the first time that the Secretary of State has heard about this matter from me. It is a matter of which the House should take cognisance. The subject is the licensing of clubs in State Management districts.

Under the Defence of the Realm (Liquor Control) Regulations of 1915, in two districts in Scotland, Cromarty Firth and Gretna, and in two in England, Carlisle and Enfield Lock, the Government of the day established, in 1915, State control of licensed premises in order to deal with the special war conditions. After the end of the war, in 1921, the inertia of the Government machine resulted in the perpetuation of this monstrosity. Under the words of Section 16 of the Licensing Act, 1921, until Parliament otherwise determines, the regulations were continued in force in the two English districts, which are under the control of the Home Secretary, and in the two Scottish districts, which are under the control of the Secretary of State for Scotland. Enfield, I understand, has been lucky enough to escape, but the other three districts still remain in the fell clutch of State management.

It is not open to me this morning to seek to change the regulations, those relics of the first world war, now embalmed in the Third Schedule to the 1921 Act. To alter them, or indeed the districts to which they apply, would require legislation. The Third Schedule to the 1921 Act confers upon the Secretary of State a complete monopoly in the sale and supply of intoxicating liquors in the two districts, and raises him wholly above the law, in as much as he does not have to apply to the licensing courts for licences to operate the licensed premises under his control. But he is given discretion, and that discretion is to make exceptions in the case of any specified class or classes of premises or clubs. It is with those discretionary powers granted to the Secretary of State that I wish to deal, and in particular with the exercise of those powers in the Gretna district, which includes the burgh of Annan and nine unfortunate parishes in the county of Dumfries. I have to be rather careful of this, because the Secretary of State can exercise his discretion either to prohibit the licence altogether or to extend it. I urge him to extend the hours of the licence. I dare say that if I pressed the case too hard an unjust Secretary of State might penalise the cause for which I am seeking an extension, but I am sure that the present Secretary of State will do no such thing. In passing, I would like to call attention to the fact that this was a case of nationalisation in a fit of absence of mind. It was a sudden access of post-war paralysis of the will. Away back in 1921 we had the whole panoply of nationalisation, not excluding that singular organ which is always doomed to perpetual frustration—the advisory council.

I should explain that the licensing hours in Dumfriesshire are II a.m. to 3 p.m. and 5 p.m. to 9 p.m., and to those hours the State management conforms. Eighteen months ago the first steps were taken to form an ex-Service club in the burgh of Annan for the burgh and district of Annan, and in due course application was made to the Secretary of State for a licence similar to that granted to the British Legion club in the Royal burgh of Dumfries. The permitted hours in the clubs in Dumfries are different from the normal licensing hours. There is a Sunday evening licence, and the club is open from 6 p.m. to 1o p.m. instead of from 5 p.m. to 9 p.m.

The Secretary of State duly referred that application to the Sheriff. The Sheriff took the advice of the burgh of Annan and of the chief constable of the county, and gave a favourable opinion. Not only that, but the advisory council also gave its blessing to the application. I remember a worthy who used to say to me: "Never ask for advice, and if you do ask for advice, never take it." The Secretary of State has possibly followed this maxim in this case. He has granted the licence, but for the local hours and not for the hours requested. This meant, in fact, as the licence was at first granted, that the club could not even serve liquor on Christmas Day, let alone Sundays. Later, the Secretary of State relented and granted permission for liquor to be served on Good Fridays and on Christmas Days, provided that Christmas Day was not a Sunday.

The reason for the choice of the hours 5 to 9 in a rural district are fairly plain. There is a scattered area. People finish their work at 5. They like to have a drink, and then they scatter to their homes, and once they are there they probably remain there. Conditions in a club are different. In the case of a club, one wants to go home, wash and get cleaned up, have a meal and then come back to the club, and possibly spend the evening there. Therefore, it is quite reasonable that the hours for the club should be 6 p.m. to 10 p.m.

I never heard of licensed hours in a club finishing at 9 o'clock, except possibly in Dingwall. It might be said it would be possible to drink from 5 to 9 without stopping and then go to the club afterwards for an extra hour. I am sure that is not possible in this particular case, but even if the club were so licensed it could be brought into line with modern hours. As a matter of fact, there are already very severe rules in the club as to the admission of non-members. The rules say that a member cannot introduce a visitor resident within 10 miles of Annan and no member is allowed to introduce a visitor after 9 p.m. The whole question is one of members, and they can be disciplined.

I am rather afraid that the reason why the licences are not granted is twofold. First of all, there is a very great temptation on the part of any State organisation to try to apply rigidity and uniformity, and, secondly, each case is not treated on the merits. I was actually told that no such exceptions had been made in the State management in the Cromarty area, which is some 25o miles away. It would be as relevant to refer to the moon, so far as this case is concerned. The only connection between Cromarty and Gretna is that both are controlled from Glasgow by the controller through St. Andrew's House in Edinburgh and the Treasury in London, which is not a very businesslike arrangement.

The second reason is the fear of competition. I cannot help feeling that the Secretary of State could not reasonably refuse a licence to an ex-Serviceman's club, but if he allowed too much business to be lost he would have the Treasury after him. If it was said, "Give them an extra hour," it might be thought that that would give them an unfair advantage. If that is so, the Dumfries Club has it, and got it from the licensing authorities. In point of fact, that argument is without foundation. It is true that the club does have better variety to offer than the State-controlled houses.

I would mention in passing that at the present time something like £84,000 is made in profits in the district. Those profits should be applied for the benefit of licensed premises in the district. The Secretary of State should not be afraid of this competition, because once he has given a decision to have a licence at all, part of the custom of licensed premises naturally passes to the club. However, once that is done, it shows broadly whether a person is a pub man or a club man. If a man goes to a club regularly he will not normally go to a pub.

I would put it to the Secretary of State that if he does not wish to give way on this issue, one will be forced to the conclusion that he is scared at the absence of tidy, arid uniformity, of competition, of the Treasury, of the unlikely possibility of excesses, and frightened that because he has yielded to a good case today he may be unable later to resist a bad one. That would represent the view of the House if he does not give way to what I consider to be a very good case, bearing in mind that in Dumfries, which is the next burgh, there are the same normal licensing hours and that all clubs have this facility.

There is no reason why State management should be less flexible and less willing to agree to concessions to clubs than the licensing authorities in Dumfries. For that reason and because the sheriff, the chief constable and his own advisory board all recommend these hours, and because of the different nature of a club and licensed premises, I hope that the Secretary of State will change his mind on this matter.

8.31 a.m.

The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Woodburn)

I should like first of all to congratulate the hon. Member on his endurance, in sitting through the night's proceedings and in his pursuit of this case. Whatever satisfaction or dissatisfaction he may have from my answer, those for whom he has been speaking must regard him as something of a hero in fighting this case right up to the bitter end.

Mr. Macpherson

I would reciprocate these remarks.

Mr. Woodburn

It has been a relay result in my case, because my predecessor made this decision, and I have sustained it. The only benefit from that is that two minds have been occupied on the question from this side. Both having come to an agreement, it seems there is a prima facie case. If two heads are better than one, our combined decision must have been better in this matter than the hon. Member's. I sympathised with the deputation that came to see me. I must say they put forward some very reasonable arguments. They almost persuaded me that their case was one of "Sweet reasonableness;" but it is not quite so clear as that. The hon. Member, for example, gave the impression that we are closing the club at 9 p.m. We are not suggesting that the club should close at 9; it can carry on until the usual time. All we are asking is to close the pub in the club at 9.

Mr. Macpherson

I did not mean to give that impression. I was talking about licensing hours.

Mr. Woodburn

I was not saying people should go to bed at 9. I said the pub should close at the same time as other licensed houses in the area. There is a justification for uniformity in this matter. The hon. Member suggested that I want to keep a monopoly for the State concerns. On the contrary, I am allowing the maximum competition because the club can keep open to the last minute that the State concerns can keep open. The hon. Member referred to monopoly. It would be monopoly for the club to be open from 9 to 10 when other places are closed.

There is a danger of lack of uniformity in this matter. If the club is to be open from 9 to 1o with a membership fee of 5s. a year—I do not know the cost of these refreshments nowadays, but I should imagine most people would spend more than that in one evening on refreshments —the club fee is almost like entry money. The club would tend to become a glorified pub rather than a club. If it is to be a club, I am anxious it should be separate and distinct. Those who want to go to the club can go to the club, and those who want to go to the pub can go to the pub. Clearly, extending the hours till 1o o'clock would open the door to abuses of the club licence, and it is certainly feared that advantage would be taken of it, so that a greater number of people would continue drinking than would otherwise be the case.

It may be said that the alternative is to keep the pubs open till 1o o'clock. Well, that has been the practice for many years. I have been well acquainted with the running of the State concerns in the Dingwell and Cromarty area, I know a little about them in Annan, and doubtless some hon. Members will be familiar with them in Carlisle. This House has frequently paid tribute to the great benefits which that experiment has brought to the people of those areas—an experiment initiated, incidentally, by a leader of the hon. Member's own party many years ago. While some people would argue that there should be no alcoholic drink at all, those* who take a reasonable view of the matter have come to the conclusion that State management is probably the finest way of dealing with what used to be a very serious problem, and what in some quarters is still regarded as difficult.

I should be very reluctant to take any step likely to undermine that great social experiment in dealing with the distribution of drink and with the drink trade in those areas. It has been such a success that, in many cases, its very success has prevented it from being extended elsewhere, because its extension would interfere with many vested interests which, quite naturally, want to preserve their own business, and their own methods of dealing. This experiment under State management has been carried on alongside the normal distribution of drink. True, it has made a profit and been very successful, but lest the hon. Member should think that we are profiteering I would point out that State management will follow the Chancellor's advice, and will try to keep prices to the public down rather than raise them. If we set an example in that direction, others may follow suit.

I hope the hon. Member will agree that I have given this matter sympathetic consideration. I repeat, his deputation were so persuasive that they almost converted me, but after examining the question very thoroughly I am satisfied that the wisest course is to maintain uniform hours in the district, and to ensure that, though there may be club and State licences, these matters are dealt with on the same basis, and that no preference is given to one or the other. That, I think, is the fair and just way of dealing with the matter; otherwise I might be compelled to go to the other extreme and give State publichouses licences to open for longer hours.

In making the following observations I do not want to be thought to be casting any reflection on the people of the country, districts in Scotland today. True, in the days of Poosie Nancy and Burns's "The Holy Fair," with people like Tam o' Shanter, who went to the inns and never got home at all——

Mr. Hector Hughes (Aberdeen, North)

Like Members of Parliament.

Mr. Woodburn

That is a very good reason for taking this course. It is the case that originally these hours were fixed with a view to benefiting the health and well-being of the community, and to promoting the active work of the people during wartime. We are now faced with a situation not less serious than that which confronted us during the war, so we must not take any step which would encourage a diminution of the healthy habits which have been formed in these areas. I hope the hon. Member will believe that I am sympathetic towards the case he has put forward. I again compliment him on the energy with which he has pursued it; but I regret that at this moment I am not able to alter my decision.

Question put, and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Twenty Minutes to Nine o'Clock a.m.