HL Deb 18 July 1997 vol 581 cc1149-51

12.49 p.m.

Lord Haskel rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 26th June be approved [5th Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble Lord said: My Lords, confusingly, this order deals with bottled beer. The order amends the Supply of Beer (Tied Estate) Order 1989, which was introduced following the Monopolies and Mergers Commission report on the supply of beer. Article 7 of the Tied Estate Order applies to the United Kingdom's national brewers, that is, those with over 2,000 pubs. It requires the national brewers to allow their tied tenants to buy one cask-conditioned beer outside the tie. This article is commonly called the guest beer provision.

The purpose of the provision was to address two concerns identified by the MMC—the limited independence that tied tenants enjoy in their choice of beers, and the restricted choice for consumers in those pubs. The provision turned out to be a great success and continues to be so. It has encouraged the production of a diverse range of beers, and increased competition in the market. The provision has been so effective in increasing the consumer's expectations that guest beers are now offered in many pubs in addition to those owned by the nationals.

Beer drinkers will be pleased to know that this order will further enhance the benefits of the guest beer provision. It will extend it to allow the nationals' tied tenants to buy at least one bottle-conditioned beer outside the tie. This will bring benefits to small brewers, tenants and consumers. Small brewers will have the opportunity to get their beers into the tied pubs of the national brewers. The tenants will also benefit because they will be able to respond to consumers' demands, and thereby better able to compete with one another. Some tenants in smaller pubs were previously reluctant to use the guest beer provision for fear that they would not sell a whole barrel of beer before it went off. This provision should overcome the practical difficulties. Consumers will benefit. There will be a larger range of beers and they will be able to try beers such as Bishop's Finger, Spitfire, and even Worthington White Shield.

The popularity of this measure is clear. A statutory consultation on a similar order to that which I am proposing here was carried out by the then Minister of Corporate and Consumer Affairs. The result of this consultation showed how strongly the extension to the provision would be welcomed by beer drinkers and brewers alike. This order will come into effect on 1st April 1998 in order to give brewers and tenants time to alter their licences.

Lastly, I should like to mention the co-operation that has existed between the Government and Europe on this issue. Both the European Commission and the European Parliament, have been of great help in checking that this new provision will accord with the relevant strictures of European law. In this regard, the Commission recently confirmed that it would not challenge the amended provision under European law. I have tried to keep this opening statement as brief as possible. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 26th June be approved [5th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Lord Haskel.)

Lord Burnham

My Lords, I had expected to be backed in the discussion on this order by serried ranks of noble brewers, all complaining about this invasion of their privileges. However, they seem to have been detained elsewhere. This order was welcomed and indeed planned by those of us who are now on this side of the House when we were on the other side. It is further supported by the Brewers and Licensed Victuallers Association. I have much pleasure in associating myself with those who welcome this order.

There is one thing I wish to ask the noble Lord. I believe that there must be the faintest fear that this order might be considered as the thin end of the wedge, which might lead to some alteration in the conditions which apply to brewers and their relationship with tied houses. Therefore, I would welcome an assurance from the noble Lord that no such thing is planned. With that exception I welcome the order.

Lord Haskel

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for his support. I imagine that the brewers are not here in their serried ranks because they are not wasting valuable drinking time. The noble Lord asked about breaking the lease. We do not believe that that will be the case because this order will not significantly increase the inspection tasks of the brewers. I am sure that the vast majority of tenants will, as now, comply with the terms of their leases. There are no plans to make any further changes. I am grateful to the noble Lord for his remarks and I commend the order to the House.

On Question, Motion agreed to.