I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
The Bill does not propose to effect any substantive change in the liquor licensing laws. It is designed to clear the way for an extension of the Dublin Metropolitan District Court District to include most, if not all, of Dublin County. Such extension of the Dublin Metropolitan Court District was recommended by the Committee on Court Practice and Procedure in their Twelfth Interim Report and it is a necessary measure to ensure the efficient organisational structuring of the District Courts in the Dublin area.
I am advised, however, that, unless this Bill is first enacted, there would be a possibility that the extension of the court district as proposed might have the effect of extending to Dublin County licensing provisions which at present are applicable in Dublin city, but not in Dublin county. The reason this is so is that section 35 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act, 1962, provides that, for the purpose of the Licensing Acts, the county borough of Dublin shall be deemed to include the whole of the Dublin Metropolitan District Court District and such borough and district shall be deemed for the purposes of those Acts, to be a city.
There are significant differences in the law relating to the sale of intoxicating liquor in its application to the county borough of Dublin on the one hand and Dublin County on the other. For example, different conditions apply in relation to the granting of new licences in the borough and in the county. Another example is the afternoon closing from 2.30 to 3.30 p.m. which applies in Dublin City but does not apply in Dublin County. Differences also apply in relation to the availability of exemptions for special events; general exemption orders and the opening of licensed premises on Sundays.
The legal position in regard to the "city" of Dublin, (that is, for the purposes of the Intoxicating Liquor Acts) is that any extension of the county borough automatically extends the "city" but the effect of any extension, or indeed contraction, of the Dublin Metropolitan District Court District is not clear. I think it is reasonable that any area incorporated into the county borough should attract the "city" provisions of the Intoxicating Liquor Acts but there is no good reason why the application of those Acts should be affected by changes in the court district. This Bill proposes, accordingly, that section 35 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act, 1962 be amended to put beyond doubt that the reference to the Dublin Metropolitan District therein is a reference to that district as it was at the passing of that Act and that the application of the Intoxicating Liquor Acts is not affected by any change in the court district effected under the Courts Acts. In other words the Bill proposes to maintain the status quo in relation to the operation of the Intoxicating Liquor Acts in Dublin city and county.
I should mention that the Bill may need to be amended to cater for two relatively minor points. The term Dublin Metropolitan District is used also in the Registration of Clubs Acts and the Bill ought to cover that also. The definition of "hotel" for the purposes of the Intoxicating Liquor Acts includes a reference to the Dublin Metropolitan District and that aspect also needs to be covered.
I commend the Bill to the House.