This Bill has been introduced for two purposes. The first is the granting of an intoxicating liquor licence for the central bus station in Áras Mhic Dhiarmada. The second is the preservation of licences attached to public-houses which are demolished by local authorities in the course of slumclearance, street-widening and so on.
The Bill provides that the licence for the bus station will be granted, and renewed from time to time, on the basis of a certificate from the Minister for Industry and Commerce specifying the part of the premises to be licensed. The Minister will not be entitled to include in the certificate any part of Áras Mhic Dhiarmada which is not part of the bus station as it is only to the bus station that the Bill applies. The licence will be an ordinary "on-licence", subject to the ordinary law relating to opening hours and so on.
C.I.E. will not be required to go to the Circuit Court for a certificate authorising the granting of the licence. The reason is, of course, that once the Oireachtas has decided that a licence should be attached to the bus station, there is no case for adjudication by the court. The decision will already have been taken by the Oireachtas.
The second part of the Bill is designed to remedy a defect in the existing law. At present, if a public-house is demolished by a local authority, the licence is extinguished and, while compensation is payable, there are times when monetary compensation, however fairly assessed, does not really recompense a person for the loss of a business which may have been in his family for years. In addition, of course, the compensation payable is a heavy burden on local authorities. There is no reason in equity why, because of a defect in the licensing laws, they should have to pay this compensation or why the publican should have to give up his business entirely.
In the other House, certain fears were expressed that the provisions relating to premises demolished by local authorities might lead to a serious interference with the rights of existing publicans in an area in which the new premises would be erected. I would point out, however, that such fears are groundless, because Section 7 of the Bill provides specifically that unless the premises are erected on the old site, or as near to it as makes no difference to other publicans, the new licence may be refused by the court on the ground that it would be unreasonably detrimental to the other publicans' trade. This is a special right of objection, introduced to ensure that existing traders are fully protected against unfair interference; it is a right much more favourable to them than the right under existing law to object on the basis of the number of existing licensed premises in the area.
Finally, I would explain that there is no question in this Bill of vesting in the local authority the power to issue a licence. The local authority will issue a certificate under Section 6, but possession of that certificate is no guarantee that the court will authorise the issue of a licence. The court will give its decision on the merits; the certificate will do nothing more than indicate to the court that the application is one to which the provisions of this Bill will apply.