HC Deb 27 July 1976 vol 916 cc516-25
Mr. Buchanan-Smith

I beg to move Amendment No. 44, in page 37, line 38, leave out from 'and' to 'eleven' in line 39 and insert 'provided that the premises are closed for any period of two and a half hours at the discretion of the licence-holder within the limits of the permitted hours'.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

With this we may take Amendment No. 48, in page 38, line 5, leave out from 'and' to 'eleven' in line 6 and insert 'provided that the premises are closed for any period of two and a half hours at the discretion of the licence holder within the permitted hours,'.

Mr. Buchanan-Smith

This is an amendment of some substance. In Committee I tried to remove from the clause the afternoon break, for reasons I described. I was defeated in Committee, and I accept the principle of that defeat and that the afternoon break should be in the legislation. What I am now seeking is that the break should be flexible and left to the discretion of the licensee. Simply having an afternoon break between two specified times, as under the Bill as drafted introduces a certain rigidity. I believe that we should be seeking greater flexibility in order to help to improve attitudes, and to ensure that the licensing legislation reflects better the customs and habits of a particular area.

In certain areas, for example, a public house may be near an industrial estate, a large factory, a shipyard or an engineering works where a particular kind of shift working is done. One might on occasion want to have the afternoon break coinciding with the time when one shift finishes and another shift comes in. By keeping the principle of the break but allowing the actual timing of it to be at the discretion of the licensee, it would be easier for the licensee to reflect more closely the habits and customs of the area in which the public house was situated and thereby to meet more nearly the needs and customs of those who might be using the premises. It is in that sense that I move the amendment.

Mr. Tom McMillan

I agree with the amendment although I think that it is badly worded. I do not think that the hours should be left to the discretion of the licence-holder. The licence-holder should apply to the board, which should specify the hours which it thinks are suitable to the district. The amendment would allow the licence-holder to vary the two and a half hours from week to week and month to month. That is the weakness of the amendment.

The Minister should consider the case of a large area in which there is a large proportion of nocturnal workers. The meat market, which is in my constituency, starts work at 6 a.m. and finishes at 2 p.m. The workers rush to the nearest pub and swallow as many drinks as possible before it closes at 2.30 p.m.

Workers such as taxi drivers who are nocturnal workers have special organisa- tions and clubs. The Press has clubs. Journalists are properly organised. Those who work nocturnal hours may use their clubs. However, the majority of nocturnal workers have no organisation. The amendment would allow a licence-holder to look at the situation in his area and choose the hours to suit it. The wording of the amendment is wrong as it would allow a licensee to change his hours from week to week and month to month.

I think that the Government might look at the possibility of licence-holders, especially in areas where there are large numbers of nocturnal workers, registering their opening hours with the board.

Mr. Harry Ewing

The amendment is concerned with the statutory afternoon break. I had the feeling that my hon. Friend was talking to the proposition that a licence-holder should have the ability to choose the hours in the day, within the number of hours laid down, when he should open. For instance, if he decided to open at 6 a.m., so be it as long as he did not exceed the 10½ hours' drinking time during the day. That is not the purpose of the amendment. Its purpose is to give flexibility to the two-and-a-half hour break so that the licence-holder, the publican, may decide when the two-and-a-half hour break should be taken during the day. There are serious defects in that.

When it emerged from Committee, the Bill contained provision for a statutory afternoon break from 2.30 until 5 p.m. The Government do not accept the Clayson proposal that there should not be an afternoon break. Clayson recommended that the drinking hours should last from 11 a.m. until 11 p.m. We do not accept the concept of a flexible afternoon break, for the good reason that people would be able to move from pub to pub drinking continuously. It would be possible for different pubs to take different afternoon breaks, thereby providing a continuous period of drinking in an area from 11 a.m. until 11 p.m.

We were not convinced by the arguments in Committee. I am sorry to tell the hon. Member for North Angus and Mearns (Mr. Buchanan-Smith) that we are not convinced this morning. I hope that he will withdraw his amendment.

Mr. Tom McMillan

My hon. Friend is a little off the mark. The idea is that the licensing board considers the application by the licence-holder and makes a decision. A public house which is near a steelworks, for example, will attract steel workers, not citizens from other parts of the town.

Mr. Ewing

Whatever Clayson was arguing, it was not for different licensing hours for different parts of Scotland. The Guest Committee, whose report was accepted by the Conservative Government in 1962, maintained the principle of uniform hours throughout Scotland, as did Clayson. There is no evidence to suggest that there is a demand for the degree of flexibility that my hon. Friend suggests. Neither committee argued that the hours should not be standard throughout Scotland.

Mr. Tom McMillan

Although Clay-son argued that, the Government did not adopt it. In Covent Garden public houses are open from 6 a.m., but only people who work in Covent Garden are allowed to enter them. That is what I had in mind. The hours should be flexible to suit the people who are being catered for.

Mr. Buchanan-Smith

I am sorry that the Minister is not prepared to accept the amendment. The hon. Member for Glasgow, Central (Mr. McMillan) put forward a valid argument which coincides with mine. In the Glasgow meat market, work usually finishes at about 2 o'clock in the afternoon and there is a rush to the public houses, which close at 2.30 p.m. We are seeking a greater degree of flexibility.

Whether the hours are laid down from day to day or from month to month, flexibility is needed. I agree with the Minister that an afternoon break should not be seen as an excuse for a denial of drinking. That is not the purpose of the amendment.

I know that the Minister is against the amendment, but I ask him, without commitment, to look again at this subject to see whether there can be a flexible system where there is a specific pattern, for example in a meat market. Overall control would rest with the licensing board. With a little ingenuity, safeguards could be introduced. We have raised a point of substance which warrants further study.

Mr. Harry Ewing

We shall have a look at it again, but I have pointed out all the difficulties and I promise to look at it without commitment.

Mr. Buchanan-Smith

I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

6.0 a.m.

Mrs. Bain

I beg to move Amendment No. 109, in page 37, line 39, leave out 'five' and insert 'six'.

In this amendment, my hon. Friend the Member for Dundee, East (Mr. Wilson) and I have recognised that a major problem exists in alcoholism. In recognising that it is a major problem, we have tried to put forward a partial solution. It is not perfect, but it is a partial solution. The Secretary of State drew attention earlier to the fact that he was concerned about the extension of licensing hours and the problems associated with that. We hope that he will support the amendment.

We hope to offer a solution to the kind of situation in which so many working men in Scotland go straight to the public house after work for what is called "a quick pint with the boys" but often tend to stay from 5 o'clock until 10.30, and then go home finding they have spent their wages. We should like a situation in which men are encouraged to go home, particularly on Thursday and Friday, take home their wages, and see their wives and families and perhaps have a meal before going out for a drink with their friends in the evening. This would help family life and do much to attack alcoholism in Scotland. If the Government will not accept the amendment, we shall press it to a vote.

Mr. Canavan

I am somewhat struck by the sheer cant and hypocrisy of the Scottish National Party in coming in like this. I wonder why this amendment was selected, because it is starred and was obviously tabled very late. I understand that there was considerable debate on this matter in Committee.

Mr. Gordon Wilson

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I think that the hon. Member was attacking the fact that the amendment has been selected. I think it is correct to say that it is in order, because these amendments were tabled within the appropriate time but were not printed on the Notice Paper.

Mr. Canavan

I am grateful for the explanation by the hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. Wilson), but I advise him to get his amendments down earlier, as other hon. Members do.

Members of the Scottish National Party, who spend much of their time upstairs in the bar, seem to be saying that although, because they work here, they can have drink literally unlimited from 11 o'clock in the morning until half an hour after the House adjourns, the ordinary working man or woman in Scotland cannot be trusted to go into a pub at 5 o'clock and have a responsible drink. Frankly, it is an insult to the working people of Scotland, and I hope that the Government will reject the amendment.

Mr. Tom McMillan

I agree with my hon. Friend. There is a little of the Rip Van Winkle about this, because industry stops between five minutes to four and 4 o'clock. There has been a big change. People do not now clock off at 5 o'clock. They have time to go home and do things and then have a drink. The Scottish National Party is a little behind the times with this.

Mr. Millan

I am not sure how the amendment got on to the Amendment Paper. I understand that it was put down in Committee but that for some extraordinary reason the hon. and kilted Member for Banff (Mr. Watt), who has joined our proceedings again, did not move it. It is a substantial amendment and it is better to consider such matters in Committee.

The amendment proposes a considerable reduction in the permitted opening hours. Despite what the hon. Lady for Dunbartonshire, East (Mrs. Bain) said, I have no evidence—and there have been studies by the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys—of a relationship between drinking from 5 to 6 p.m. and heavy drinking. In fact, it seems to be mostly social drinking. It would be a considerable reduction in social convenience to prevent people having a drink on their way home from work.

It may be undesirable for social and other reasons for someone to go straight to a pub after work and to stay until closing time, but we must draw a balance between that situation and the fact that many people use pubs between 5 and 6 p.m. for the reasonable purpose of having a drink before going home. I do not think that we should deny them that facility.

Mrs. Bain

The Secretary of State has missed the point of social responsibility in the context of the amendment. As a woman, I emphasise that our amendment reflects the view of many wives in Scotland who want their husbands to go home after work—whatever time they finish—before going to a public house. The temptation for men to stay in a public house, especially on pay day, is great. The Secretary of State should recognise these human weaknesses.

The hon. Member for West Stirling-shire (Mr. Canavan) claimed earlier that he was concerned about the welfare of bar staff and attendants working in public houses. It would be to their advantage if the amendment were accepted, because they would be able to spend more time at home with their children.

Mr. William Ross

I have a certain sympathy with the amendment, but it was not moved in Committee—which shows a certain amount of contempt for the Committee—even though it is now said to be so important. These facts do not add up.

Mr. Harry Ewing

The Chairman asked the hon. Member for Banff (Mr. Watt) in Committee whether he wished to move Amendment No. 108. The hon. Member said "No". The hon. Member was then asked whether he wanted a separate vote on Amendment No. 108. He again replied "No". That is recorded at col. 517 of the Committee's proceedings of Tuesday 22nd June.

Mr. Ross

That makes it all the more amazing that the hon Lady the Member for Dunbartonshire, East (Mrs. Bain) should come along and tell us how important the amendment is. The Scottish National Party should have seized its chance in Committee. I am surprised that in these circumstances the amendment has been selected. I know that the Chair does not give reasons why amendments are selected or not selected, but the point made earlier about starred amendments is pertinent. Starred amendments are not usually selected and there must be a special reason in this instance, although I am not aware of one.

The hon. Lady also talked about pay day, but what we are discussing does not occur only on pay day. It happens every day of the week. I have not the slightest doubt that the great majority of women in Scotland do not want to see pubs open on Sunday, yet the hon. Lady, who claims that she is concerned about the feelings of wives and women in Scotland, went into the Lobby in favour of pubs being open on Sunday. There is a certain element of hypocrisy in that.

Mr. Canavan

On a point of order, Mt. Deputy Speaker. Earlier this evening the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Taylor) was allowed to make two contributions during a debate with the leave of the House. May I please do so now. I shall confine my remarks to one paragraph.

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Oscar Murton)

I regret to say that the hon. Gentleman must have the leave of the House.

Mr. Ross

I had given way to my hon. Friend the Member for West Stirlingshire (Mr. Concannon), Mr. Deputy Speaker. I had not finished my remarks.

Mr. Canavan

I wanted to point out that the hon. Member for Dunbartonshire, East (Mrs. Bain) and I, when we were both employed as school teachers in Stirling, often used to adjourn at the end of term to an inn in Bannockburn along with her colleagues in the teaching profession at 5 o'clock. What she is trying to do is to make those meetings illegal. She is trying to make the unfortunate teachers wait until 6 o'clock in order to get a drink in a pub.

Mr. Ross

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. That confirms what I thought, that there is an element of hypocrisy in this belated amendment. The Scottish National Party is trying to save its face because the majority of its Members voted in favour of Sunday opening.

Mr. Gordon Wilson

I am surprised that the former Secretary of State for Scotland should adopt the attitude he has. This amendment has been put down in the names of myself and my hon. Friend the Member for Dunbartonshire, East (Mrs. Bain). We are perfectly entitled to put forward such amendments as we wish. Neither I nor my hon. Friend was a member of the Committee, and we are perfectly entitled to table the amendment. It has been selected, and the right hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Ross) expressed some vague sympathy with it. We considered that the amendment contained an important point, and my hon. Friend indicated that she was not satisfied with the answer which has been given by the Minister. Neither am I. In those circumstances, I cannot see how we can do other than press the amendment.

Question put, That the amendment be made:—

The House divided: Ayes 7, Noes 50.

[For Division List No. 289 see col. 615.]

Question accordingly negatived.

Amendment made: No. 47. in page 37, line 43, at end insert but only in the case of premises in respect of which an application for Sunday opening has been made to and granted by a licensing board in accordance with the provisions of Schedule (Sunday opening of premises in respect of which a public house licence or refreshment licence is in force and Sunday restriction orders relating to licensed premises) to this Act, which shall have efiect.'.—[Mr. Millan.]

Amendment proposed: No. 49, in page 38, line 14, at end insert—

'(5) Notwithstanding the provisions above, the permitted hours under subsection (2) above shall only include Sundays in licensing board areas where the adult population express a desire to have Sunday opening.

(6) To establish public opinion under subsection (5) above, each licensing board shall, on a day to be appointed by the Secretary of State, hold a referendum on Sunday opening and if a majority of those voting in the referendum vote for Sunday opening, the permitted hours shall be deemed to include Sundays.

(7) If, not later than 30 days of a date to be specified by the Secretary of State each five years from the date of the referendum under subsection (6) above, 10 per cent. of the electors in a licensing board area request a further referendum, the licensing board shall hold a further poll'.—[Mr. Teddy Taylor.]

Question put, That the amendment be made:—

The House divided: Ayes 12, Noes 45.

[For Division List No. 290 see col. 617.]

Question accordingly negatived.

Forward to