HL Deb 08 June 1992 vol 537 cc1105-8

3.9 p.m.

Lord Dormand of Easington

My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time.

This Bill was given a Second Reading on 10th March of this year. There was no opposition on that day. Indeed there was support for the Bill, including an assurance from the Minister that the Government welcomed the measure.

There was however the problem that the general election intervened in the discussion on the Bill. As your Lordships are aware, the election was held on 9th April and it meant that the Bill could not proceed in the previous Session. There is no alternative therefore but for me to repeat the reasons for introducing the Bill. I hope your Lordships will bear with me for a few minutes while I do so.

I shall comment on the background to the Bill as follows. Section 3 of the Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol etc.) Act 1985 created a framework for the licensing of football clubs for the sale of alcohol on the premises. In principle this is not a problem. However, the practical application of the Act's provisions is creating administrative difficulties and nuisance for clubs. It is also unnecessarily increasing the workload of the licensing authorities.

The Act requires that clubs should apply to the justices for licences every five months. This effectively means that each club has to apply for a licence twice in one season. This is an administrative inconvenience. The Football League has sought evidence from the League clubs as to the working of this section of the 1985 Act. It is clear that most clubs have good relationships with their police and licensing justices, and encounter no problems in obtaining an order. I am sure your Lordships will appreciate that this is an important aspect of the situation. The clubs therefore see no reason why an application has to be made twice each season. They would prefer to apply for their licences once a year.

The League has made detailed inquiries at the Home Office. Officials there cannot explain why it is that the 1985 Act required applications every five months. It seems that this is just an anomaly. I understand that the Home Office will not oppose the modest change sought in this Bill.

The Bill has just two clauses. Clause 1 seeks to replace in the 1985 Act the words "five months" with the words "twelve months". This will correct the current anomaly. Clause 2 simply contains the Short Title and limits the Bill's extent to England and Wales only. This is only a very minor change to the existing legislation. It will not result in any change to the principle intended in the 1985 Act. It will however provide for greater administrative efficiency for both football clubs and licensing authorities.

I know that many people are anxious about the effects of alcohol—perhaps I should mention that I am a member of the parliamentary all-party group on alcohol misuse—but they need not have any worries about this proposed change in the law. I hope that I have made it clear—I repeat this merely for emphasis—that the change suggested is simply one that seeks to improve administrative efficiency. I beg to move.

Moved, That the Bill be now read a second time. —(Lord Dormand of Easington.)

3.19 p.m.

Lord Dean of Beswick

My Lords, I shall not repeat the Second Reading speech that I made on a previous occasion when this Bill was presented just before the recent general election by my noble friend Lord Dormand.

The points my noble friend has made are correct. It seems nonsense that the period of five months was ever written into the Bill. However, perhaps one or two noble Lords who were involved in the original discussions on the Bill may have better memories or may know more about it than the civil servants whose advice was sought recently by Ministers.

The original Bill was rushed through another place and was rushed through your Lordships' House with indecent haste. That was done with the agreement of all the parties in another place and all the parties in your Lordships' House. Some of us, including the noble Lord, Lord Harris of Greenwich, the noble Lord, Lord Wigoder, and myself, tried to have some sense put into the Bill and to delay its implementation because we thought that it was a poor Bill and that your Lordships' House needed more time to consider it.

Advice was sought from a variety of sources. I believe that the noble Lord, Lord Harris, was in touch with national representatives of the police, and licensing authorities were also consulted. Nevertheless, the Government went ahead with the Bill. A period of five months was written into the Bill despite the fact that the majority of alcohol licences are granted for 12 months or longer. Depending on the local licensing authority, licences may be issued for one year, two years or up to five years.

I shall not delay your Lordships longer because there is a Statement to come and two further debates. The case has been put cogently and accurately by my noble friend Lord Dormand of Easington. I can say on behalf of my party that we support the Bill. When the Bill came before the House just before the election, the Minister indicated that it would have a quick passage in order to be in place for the commencement of the next football season. I hope that we can see sufficient progress for that to happen. I support the Bill.

3.11 p.m.

The Viscount of Falkland

My Lords, I apologise to the noble Lord for getting to my feet, but as my name was the next on the list of speakers I assumed that I would be the next to speak. However, that does not matter.

We support the Bill, as I said when we discussed it in March. The situation has not changed. It also has my personal support as a vice-chairman of the all-party group on alcohol misuse. Twelve months seems to be the right period rather than five months. Nobody knows why five months was included in the original legislation.

In an ideal world we should not have to legislate for the control of alcohol in sports grounds, but unfortunately we do. The situation seems to have improved in football grounds but anyone who saw on television at the weekend the rowdy scenes at Edgbaston will be aware that lager louts now appear to have moved to what were considered more sedate sports events. The problem is with us and I fear that we may even have to legislate again in the future. It is a great pity, but there we are. It is not that the alcohol becomes more plentiful, stronger or cheaper; it is just that people's ability to control themselves, behave properly and consider others seems to be diminishing. All of us in your Lordships' House find that deplorable.

Having said that, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Dormand of Easington, for explaining this simple legislation so well. We wish it a quick passage to the statute book.

3.13 p.m.

Viscount Astor

My Lords, your Lordships may recall that I spoke on the previous occasion in March when the noble Lord, Lord Dormand of Easington, introduced a Bill to amend the Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol etc.) Act 1985. On that occasion I welcomed the opportunity that the Bill presented to extend the maximum period for which an exemption order may be issued to sell alcohol at designated grounds.

As I explained then, the Bill, if enacted, would not relax any of the controls on the sale of alcohol. The police would retain their powers to step in and close bars if they foresaw a problem. The amendment would simply reduce the administrative burden on ground authorities and the courts.

It was unfortunate that events in another place prevented the progress of the noble Lord's previous Bill, though the events in another place had a satisfactory outcome. I must congratulate the noble Lord on his resolve in bringing forward again this practical and useful Bill. The Government welcome it as a sensible measure and I hope that your Lordships will do the same.

3.14 p.m.

Lord Dormand of Easington

My Lords, I am grateful for the all-round support which has been given to the Bill in this short debate. It seems to be generally accepted—and I am grateful to the Minister for himself emphasising it—that there is an anomaly in the 1985 Act. I understand that there will be no objections when the Bill goes to another place. I repeat what my noble friend Lord Dean said from the Front Bench. I hope that the Minister will do all that he can to expedite this simple measure. I am grateful to see that I have his assent.

I trust that your Lordships will give the Bill a second reading.

On Question, Bill read a second time, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.