In my opening statement on this Bill I confined myself to giving a very general summary of the provisions of the Bill which I mentioned was of a detailed nature. I then said that the discussions on the merits or demerits of particular proposals contained in the Bill would have to await the Committee Stage. I mentioned that the primary matters which the Government had in mind were: (1) the abolition of bona fide hours; (2) the necessity for uniformity in opening hours in all parts of the country; (3) the adjustment of the opening hours on week days to meet the reasonable needs of the public, and (4) the question of general Sunday opening in place of the bona fide hours and the hours of opening granted under the area exemption orders.
There seems to be general acceptance in the House that the bona fide trade should be abolished. With the exception of one or two Deputies I did not hear one voice raised in favour of its retention. On the question of uniformity of hours, I pointed out in my opening statement that the Government regarded it as essential that the hours during which a licensed premises could remain open for the sale of drink should be the same for all parts of the country whether in the cities, towns, holiday resorts or rural areas. I pointed out that if we were to have a differential in the hours of trading as between cities and rural areas it would result in a re-creation of the old situation of people travelling to get a drink.
Nevertheless, despite all I said along those lines, the opening speaker for Fine Gael, Deputy Cosgrave, made a plea for later hours in rural areas than for county boroughs and for special provisions for later opening in tourist resorts. It is plain that Deputy Cosgrave is endeavouring to preserve the bona fide trade in substance while not actually saying so, in so many words. However, he was repudiated almost immediately by Deputy Blowick who said that he was glad that the bona fide traffic was being done away with, by Deputy Giles who said he would be glad to see it “wiped out” and later, again, by Deputy Lindsay, who condemned it whole heartedly.
I would have expected that Deputy Dillon, as Leader of the Opposition, would say what he felt on each one of the four primary principles of the Bill but he did not give us any enlightenment. He did say that the Fine Gael Party must vote against the Bill in its present form because they feel that its proposals in respect of the opening hours are not appropriate. The Deputy did not say in what respect they were not appropriate. It makes me begin to think that this is the old Fine Gael tactic of being all things to all men or, as they say in the country, running with the hare and hunting with the hounds. Deputy Cosgrave seems to be in favour of measures to keep the bona fide traffic alive while Deputy Lindsay condemns it unreservedly. Deputy Giles says he is satisfied that the Minister has made a good effort to improve matters while Deputy Ryan explains that Fine Gael will be voting against the Bill on the Second Stage because they believe that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.
If Deputy Ryan is in any doubt he should consult Deputy Belton who is a member of the licensed trade and who said in Column 128:
"Publicans and their assistants are servants of the public. They are in the catering trade and must work and carry on their employment when the rest of the people have their leisure or are on holidays."
Also, at Column 123, he asked for opening hours on Sundays from 12.30 p.m. to 2 p.m. and from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. On the other hand Deputy T. Lynch suggests that in no circumstances should there be opening after 7 p.m. What I want to know is where do they stand in regard to this Bill at all? Have they made up their minds as to whether the week-day hours and the Sunday hours should spread over this or that period? I shall not go into the merits or demerits of those matters until the Committee Stage but I want to say now that the Government accept the Commission's majority report that the present closing hours on week-days in the county boroughs are too early and that they are satisfied that the hours proposed in the Bill are reasonable. The Government are satisfied that there must be no differential between the closing hours inside and outside the county boroughs.
The same principle applies to the Sunday hours. Whatever is decided must be the same for all parts of the country. There can be no question of a differential in the hours between certain areas which would simply result in a re-creation of the bona fide trade in another way. While I do not want to go into the merits or demerits of particular proposals at this stage or why the Bill is silent on some matters which on superficial examination may appear to require amendment of the law, I feel that I must correct some misconceptions which some Deputies appear to have so as to save trouble later on.
The absence from the Bill of any special provision for the benefit of six-day licensees has come in for a great deal of criticism. One might be justified in thinking from what some Deputies have said that it is a simple matter to provide here that all six-day licences should become seven-day licences overnight and that nobody would be the sufferer. As Deputies are no doubt aware, the matter has been considered by two licensing commissions, one in 1925 and the other in 1957, and neither commission could see their way to support the case made for the six-day licensee.