What amendment of the Licensing Acts does the Bill propose to effect?
Intoxicating Liquor Bill, 1980: Committee and Final Stages.
Question proposed: "That section 1 stand part of the Bill."
Section 35 of the 1962 Act.
In what way is section 35 of the 1962 Act to be different from the way it is now?
If the Dublin Metropolitan Court District was extended to include County Dublin, and if the Bill were not introduced the liquor licensing laws as they apply in Dublin city, such as "the holy hour", registration of clubs, the requirement in relation to hotels of 20 bedrooms in Dublin city as against ten in Dublin county, would be extended to Dublin county.
Are we to take it, then, that the Dublin metropolitan district is now to be confined to the area over which the Dublin Metropolitan District Court at Morgan Place exercises its jurisdiction?
I understand so.
It has been assumed up to now that the Dublin metropolitan Garda area is part of the city of Dublin for the purposes of the Intoxicating Liquor Acts. Will this be still the case?
That is not the case at the moment, and there is no change in the Garda districts as far as this is concerned.
I find myself in a difficulty concerning section 35 of the 1962 Act where it says "References in the Licensing Acts to the Dublin Metropolitan Area shall be deemed to be references to the Dublin Metropolitan District". It does not make it clear whether we are talking about the Dublin Metropolitan District Court area or the Dublin Metropolitan Garda area.
The Garda area has no relevance to the District Court area.
It has been said that in so far as section 35 has been implemented, references to the Dublin metropolitan area have been taken to mean the Garda area and not the District Court area.
The Dublin metropolitan district is the city for licensing purposes. It is not affected in any way by Garda districts. They are not affected by the licensing laws or the court districts one way or another.
Is the Minister of State saying that the two areas — the Garda area and the District Court area — are not co-terminous?
They are not.
So that there will be no change?
There could not be any change, and there is no relevance of one to the other.
Question put and agreed to.
Section 2 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment, received for final consideration and passed.
Sitting suspended at 4.35 p.m. and resumed at 4.40 p.m.