I move:—
Go bhfuil sé oiriúnach a údarú go n-íocfar amach as airgead a sholáthróidh an tOireachtas aon chostaisí fé n-a raghfar chun aon Acht do chur in éifeacht a rithfar sa tSiosón so chun an dlí a bhaineas le díol deocha meisciúla do leasú agus chun cuid di do chó-dhlúthú agus chun comhacht do thabhairt chun líon na gceadúnaisí diolta deocha meisciúla do laigheadú tré dheire do chur o am go ham le ceadúnaisí áirithe aca san agus chun an dlí a bhaineas le clárú clubanna do leasú.
That it is expedient to authorise the payment out of moneys to be provided by the Oireachtas of any expenses incurred in carrying into effect any Act of the present Session to amend and in part consolidate the law relating to the sale of intoxicating liquor, to enable the number of licences for the sale of intoxicating liquor to be reduced by the abolition from time to time of certain such licences, and to amend the law relating to the registration of clubs.
There will be expenses under several heads incurred in carrying this Act into operation. In the first place, assessors will have to be appointed in the matter of fixing the amount of compensation to be paid when a licence is extinguished. That will not be a serious drain on the resources of the State, because the process of extinguishing licences will go on over a period of years, and the amount involved will be comparatively small. In seven or eight years' time it might amount to, say, £20,000. When a licence is extinguished, certain liabilities will fall on the remaining licensed holders in particular licensing areas.rical work will be involved in the management of the compensation fund. That will not be a very expensive thing because the number of licences to be extinguished will only gradually rise to any considerable amount. It can only happen over a period of years, not merely for financial reasons but because of the formalities that will have to be gone through and of the proceedings that will be necessary before the courts. It is provided in the Bill that the amount of compensation awarded is to be repaid by the remaining licence holders in the area over a period of 20 years by means of an annuity of £7 10s. per cent.
It has been remarked that an annuity of £7 10s., with the present rate of interest, would not amortise £100 in 20 years. It would only amortise £94 10s. 4d. We are at present paying 5¼ per cent. or slightly over that, but it is not anticipated that during the period in which this Act will be put into operation that the rate of interest which the Government will have to pay will remain as high as that. I feel satisfied, and it is the conclusion that anybody would draw looking at the present price of National Loan, that when the State next borrows it will be able to borrow at a figure under 5¼ per cent. I do not say that it will be able to borrow at 5 per cent., but it would be able to borrow at less than 5¼ per cent. We may take it, I think, that over a period of seven or eight years from now the rate of interest payable on Government borrowings will average, say, 5 per cent. I do not think that we can anticipate an average of less than 5 per cent. An annuity of £7 10s. over twenty years will not amortise £100 even at 5 per cent. It will amortise £93 9s. 4d., so that assuming that the main work of abolition contemplated under this Bill, and contemplated under the Report of the Liquor Commission, takes place within the next seven or ten years, we may take it that for every £100 paid in compensation the annuity of £7 10s. over twenty years will only pay back £93 9s. 4d. That means that there will be, in effect, a State contribution into the Compensation Fund of a sum of £6 10s. 8d. That figure of £6 10s. 8d. is agreed to for a variety of reasons. It is regarded as absolutely fair that the remaining licence holders should pay for the compensation of the licences that are abolished. It is recognised that the person whose property is acquired compulsorily gets a good price, and sometimes he gets a trifle over a good price by reason of the fact that the compensation is compulsory, but certainly if he never gets too much, if you take the number of people whose property has been acquired compulsorily, the average price is perhaps better a little than a good average price. There is also the fact to be borne in mind that the compensation awarded will include not merely actual compensation for the loss of the licence both to the occupier and the lessor, but it will include a certain sum in regard to costs. In paragraph (c) of sub-section (3) of Section 36, it will be seen that the compensation payable shall include:
"In any case such additional sum as the compensation authority shall consider reasonable in view of the fact that the parties receiving the compensation have to bear their own costs of all proceedings in relation to the compensation and, in the case of the holder of the licence, of the reference order and the abolition order."
Now in the ordinary way if a person were selling voluntarily he should bear his costs of sale, but where a person is not selling voluntarily but where his property is taken compulsorily it is reasonable that some allowance should be made for his costs so that the amount of expense he has to incur in connection with the matter shall be taken into account. On the other hand while it is fair that the remaining licence holders should pay for the value of the licences it is perhaps asking a little too much to require them to pay for the legal and other costs of the person whose licence was abolished in the various proceedings leading up to abolition and the award of compensation.
This Licensing Bill represents a social reform, and if some little expense falls on the State it is fair enough that the State should bear that. It is felt therefore that this contribution, as I might call it, of about £6 10s. in every £100 is reasonable, that it is not a gift to the remaining licence holders, that considering all the circumstances, considering the somewhat good price that is pretty sure to be awarded in proceedings for compulsory acquisition, having regard to the legal costs which will be incurred and which will be included in the compensation, it seems to be not too much that this £6 10s. should be paid.
The licences which will be abolished compulsorily will be, broadly speaking, licences of small value. Considerations are laid down in the Bill as to the selection of licences for abolition, but generally speaking they will be of comparatively small value, and it has been estimated tentatively that if we extinguish, during a period of years, say seven or ten years ahead, something like 4,000 licences that the average compensation for those 4,000 licences ought not to be more than £300 a-piece. There will be many licences extinguished which will not be valued for anything like £300. Others will be valued for considerably more. For this we assume a figure of £300, which, I think, is a reasonable figure. It means that the 4,000 licences could be extinguished at a cost of £1,200,000. If the State has to assume liability for the repayment of, roughly, £6 10s. in every £100 it means that something like £78,000 or a little more is the amount that will fall due to be paid by the general taxpayer. With those figures in mind, and the figure I indicated of the costs that will fall on the State in connection with the payment of assessors, I think the liability to the general taxpayer—of course the liability will be spread over a great many years, it will not fully mature until twenty years after the 4,000 licences have actually been abolished—would be something in the nature of £100,000.