LICENSING (AIRPORTS) BILL [H.L.] (Hansard, 19 July 1955)

§ LORD MANCROFT
My Lords, since your Lordships accorded a Second Reading to this 13il1, one small point has arisen to which I think I ought to make some passing reference. As your Lordships know, the new arrangements suggest that licensing for twenty-four hours a day shall be permitted in those bars at the international airports of our country that lie within the customs barrier. That confines the facilities to bona-fide travellers and a few airport officials. As has been pointed out to us, it is felt that facilities will be available to the airline pilots, and some fears have been expressed less the pilots be subjected to a certain temptation. I want to make it perfectly clear that, so far as British air lines are concerned, the rules are most strict. In both Corporations and in the independent air lines, no pilots are allowed to drink at all whilst in uniform, and no pilot is allowed to drink at all for eight hours before he flies an aircraft. Of course, these same pilots are subjected to the temptations of twenty-four-hour licensing in other airports of the world which they visit, but no difficulty has arisen in that respect. These rules have been most scrupulously adhered to. I think I can set at rest the minds of those who have feared that the pilots may be subjected to some temptation. With that brief reference to the point that has recently arisen, I beg to move that the Bill be read a third time.

§ LORD MATHERS
My Lords, I am very glad indeed that the noble Lord has made that explanation. Yet there is still a certain amount of perturbation about the fact that these increased drinking facilities are being provided. The noble Lord has given an explanation which makes clear what he said on Second Reading [OFFICIAL. REPORT, Vol. 193 col. 602]: I must admit that certain airport officials can also make use of the bars—people who work there, like the police, the immigration officers and staff from the Home Office. He was careful to follow the words which I have quoted by saying that if he himself, 870 connected with the Home Office, were on the spot he would not be entitled to use the facilities. I3ut the point arises: why should it not be shown that these facilities are for the people for whom they are intended? The noble Lord's speech on Second Reading showed clearly that the facilities were intended for bona-fide travellers who were still travelling and not for those who were landing and coming into this country—at least, not so much for them. It seems to me that the fact that there is still a loophole for people who are not intended to be covered by these facilities is regrettable. Surely, it could have peen shown in the Bill that only bona-fide travellers were entitled to make use of the new facilities that were being provided.
But I am glad to think that the noble Lord has removed the much greater misapprehension that was in the mind, for example, of the noble Earl. Lord Rosebery, when there was a discussion in this House on July 7 on the tourist industry. In concluding his speech, the noble Earl said [OFFICIAL REPORT, Vol. 193, col. 534]: It means twenty-four hours' licensing in Prestwick which will be most welcome—not that we are a particularly thirsty race ourselves, but it will enable us suitably to welcome our guests from overseas, and also from England, at all hours of the day and night. Obviously, in the light of what has fallen from the noble Lord in charge of the Bill on the Second Reading and to-day, it is clear beyond a peradventure that the idea that the noble Earl, Lord Rosebery, had about the way in which the facilities would be available is erroneous. I am glad that that position has been made clear. Air passengers coming in, who are within the customs barrier, will have an opportunity of using these bars; but I take it that those who are meeting them will not have the opportunity of using the facilities.

§ LORD MANCROFT
That is quite right.

§ LORD MATHERS
I suggest that that would he a serious thing, because it would mean that the friends who were meeting the air passengers coming in at any time of the day or night, and wishing to treat their friends, would naturally themselves take liquor and thereby would perhaps not be able quite so safely to take their friends away from the airport to their 871 destinations. I hope that these facilities will be carefully watched and that they will not, as some people feel, be simply a stepping stone to a further relaxation of drinking restrictions in this country.
I urge upon the Government the necessity for safeguarding the position very strictly indeed. The drink interests in this country are most powerful, and there is no doubt that, on the pretext of serving the reasonable needs (as they will put it) of people coming here from abroad, they will want a further extension of facilities of this kind. We in this country put restrictions upon the sale and supply of alcoholic liquor, and rightly so; we do it because our experience shows that alcoholic liquor can be a dangerous thing. I hope that the experience of the past will guide us in seeing that these facilities are not abused and are not extended, because there is still a long way to go before we are able to frustrate or remove the conditions and the menace caused by the abuse of the drinking habit.