HL Deb 25 July 1990 vol 521 cc1536-9

7.13 p.m.

Lord Strathclyde rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 2nd July be approved [24th Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble Lord said: My Lords, the draft order would amend two 1988 orders—the Weights and Measures (Intoxicating Liquor) Order and the Weights and Measures (Miscellaneous Foods) Order. Those orders approved by your Lordships' House in November 1988 contain detailed provisions for the sale of food and drink.

There are three amendments to the intoxicating liquor order. First, we are proposing to add 25 millilitres to the existing imperial range of quantities of ¼ [...] and [...] gill in which gin, rum, vodka and whisky may be sold for consumption on the premises. Sales in the imperial quantities would be prohibited after the end of 1994. In response to representations on those proposals, the Government intend to consult interested parties about the possibility at a later stage of extending the requirements to sell in prescribed quantities to other spirits and of permitting a further round metric quantity of 35 millilitres.

Secondly, from the beginning of 1995, still table wines sold by the glass for consumption on the premises may be dispensed only in quantities of 125 millilitres and 175 millilitres. Thirdly, to implement a recent amendment to the EC directive on pre-packed liquids, some minor changes are proposed to the range of prescribed quantities for pre-packed still table wines.

The draft order before your Lordships' House also includes four minor amendments to the miscellaneous foods order. The draft order was sent to over 200 organisations representing United Kingdom manufacturers, importers, retailers, consumers and enforcement authorities. The comments we received have been taken into account in drawing up the current text.

I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 2nd July be approved [24th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Lord Strathclyde.)

Lord Bruce of Donington

My Lords, I dissent very little from what the noble Lord has said. The order covers a most agreeable subject. Most of us from time to time have spent pleasurable minutes, sometimes hours, imbibing the liquids concerned, whether or not in the quantities prescribed and whether in gills or millilitres.

It would not be entirely out of order if I were to refer, in parenthesis, to the grossly extortionate charges for non-alcoholic refreshment. I hope that as part of the noble Lord's duties at the DTI some attention may be given to that undesirable factor which afflicts the harmless and alcohol-free enjoyment of so many of our citizens.

The noble Lord may consider giving some thanks to my noble friend Lord Mason who can claim some paternity of this regulation. My noble friend, who is zealous on all matters affecting consumers and in particular those who enjoy consuming tobacco or imbibing alcohol, has always paid close attention to the matter. He has fought for some time to have the sale of wine by the glass put on a proper footing. Some measure of thanks should be accorded my noble friend who has fought on these matters and whose proposals have largely been incorporated in the regulations. He deserves some credit. We have no objection to the order.

Lord Mason of Barnsley

My Lords, I welcome the measure. It is the culmination of a campaign that I have waged for years to introduce legislation in place of a code of conduct which has largely been ignored by all who sell wine by the glass. The objective has been to obtain a fair deal for the wine consumer who should be aware of the quantity of wine he is to receive and the price per measure.

All of the bodies and societies in the trade agreed a code of conduct based on those facts. The code came into effect in May 1984. Since then it has been ignored by the majority of those who sell wine by the glass. Indeed, they still ignore it on a large scale.

I have raised the matter in parliamentary Questions on 22 occasions. We have debated the issue in this House and I introduced a Bill to make the code compulsory. I am pleased to say that the Government eventually respected my view and, by agreement, took over the Bill—hence the order. I am grateful to the noble Lord and to the Department of Trade and Industry for being so helpful.

The measure introduces prescribed quantities of 125 millilitres and 175 millilitres and multiples thereof. This I welcome. Most wine is sold in those measures. In particular the order deals with still table wines. It also requires that a statement in writing showing quantities in which still table wines are sold shall be prominently displayed. Therefore, the code is to be changed into a legislative requirement. Customers buying wine by the glass will be able to make an informed choice as the measure and price must be displayed where still table wines are sold in the prescribed measures. All that is to the good.

However, I should like consideration to be given to the introduction by legislation of lined wine glasses, especially in the prescribed sizes. That is being introduced in the beer trade. There is no reason why this consumer protection measure should not be established for wine drinkers.

I am also concerned about the date for the introduction of this measure, which is on or after 1st January 1995. The date is not even specific. Moreover, it is nearly five years hence. I realise that it has been chosen to coincide with the implementation date of 31st December 1994 when sales of spirits on licensed premises will change from being served in gills to a single metric quantity of 25 millilitres. However, I believe that the timing of this legislation for the sale of wine by the glass should be reconsidered.

I have explained in previous debates that every survey carried out by trading standards officers—by LACOTS (the Local Authority Committee on Trading Standards)—found that well over 70 per cent. of wine traders or wine sellers ignored the code of conduct and often fleeced the wine consumer. This has already gone on for five and a half years. I therefore ask: are the wine consumers not to be protected for another four and a half years? It is ludicrous. There is substantial evidence that the code has not worked and that legislation is urgently needed. Yet this order is not to be implemented legislatively for another four and a half years.

The latest survey by trading standards officers found in seven counties, after visiting 110 premises with 189 separate bars—this is an indication of the size and seriousness of the problem which ignores codes and ignores the law in the beer and wine trades—that 71 per cent. of the beer and 74 per cent. of the lager served were short measures. In some cases there were deficiencies as high as 15 per cent. for beer and 10 per cent. for lager. In the same survey, with regard to wines served by the glass 80 per cent. of premises did not fully comply with the code of practice. So the situation still goes on. If licensed premises had abided by the code, legislation would not have been necessary. But easy gains have been too good to be ignored.

If the Government took the view that licensed premises were abiding by the present code, they should not need nearly five years to prepare for the introduction of this order. I hope that LACOTS will continue its surveys and give us the opportunity to raise periodically in this House the results of its proceedings before legislation is implemented. It would be interesting to learn the burdens that would be placed on the trade if a more immediate date of operation were to be introduced.

I welcome this measure but I earnestly hope that Her Majesty's Government will speed up its introduction and take the earliest opportunity to give the wine consumer a fair and honest deal.

Lord Renton

My Lords, I cannot speak with any authority from the ministerial point of view and I am not much of a consumer. But I should like to say that in our primary legislation we go into far too much detail. When such detail is found to be necessary, as the noble Lord, Lord Mason, pointed out—and we should pay tribute to him, as did the noble Lord, Lord Bruce, for the initiatives that he has shown—it is gratifying to find that a statutory instrument, secondary legislation, can bring forward such detail and that it is acceptable to noble Lords on both sides of the House. It is a lesson to us all that, although we must have detail in some (but not all) matters on which we legislate, it is better to have as much as possible put into secondary legislation, as happens on this occasion, rather than take up time with endless amendments trying to get the detail right in primary legislation.

For that reason alone, and without going into the merits, I too welcome this measure.

Lord Strathclyde

My Lords, I very much welcome the words of all noble Lords who have spoken, and in particular those of my noble friend Lord Renton. I agree with him that in this case it makes good sense to bring in these changes in regulations rather than through primary legislation. I am also grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Bruce of Donington, for giving a warm welcome to the regulations. I hope that he will not take it the wrong way when I say to him that no doubt he will change his attitude toward the Department of Trade and Industry and, in this instance, regard it as having done a very good job.

I join him in congratulating the noble Lord, Lord Mason of Barnsley. I was the unfortunate Minister responsible at the time of one of the debates a couple of years ago when I was generally harangued from around the House about sales of wine by the glass. I was obstructive then, so it is a delight to come to the House with this order.

The noble Lord, Lord Mason, is not entirely satisfied and would like to see the regulation brought in considerably faster. We have to consider the needs of the consumer and also the needs of the licensee. We have come to the conclusion that the best way to bring in this order is to do it over a period of years so as to allow licensees, especially those who do not sell very much wine, to adjust to the new regulations and to replace their glasses.

A point was raised about using a lined container. Such a container is not usual when dealing with the sale of spirits. I am not entirely convinced by the argument that it should be used for wine.

Having said that, I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Mason, is extremely pleased with the work that he has done over a number of years and that he will recognise that a Conservative Government have brought in this measure and have shown themselves to be caring about the needs of the noble Lord and have listened to them.

On Question, Motion agreed to.