| Previous Section | Home Page |
Mr. Gerald Bermingham (St. Helens, South) : Does the hon. Gentleman agree that if one puts "alcohol free" on the label of a drink that contained a percentage of alcohol, but was below the required alcohol level, one would be misleading the public? They would believe that the drink was alcohol free and what would happen to those persons who suffer from an illness that makes them allergic to anything that contains alcohol? Would they be put at risk?
Mr. Gregory : I share some of the hon. Gentleman's reservations and I look forward to debating this further with him on Report. The purpose of the Bill is to remove from the Licensing Act 1964 and the Licensing (Scotland) Act 1976 certain words that prevent some beverages with low alcohol content from being sold without a justice's licence or the Scottish equivalent. The definition of "intoxicating liquor" in section 201(1) of the Licensing Act 1964 contains an exception for, inter alia :
"any liquor, whether made on the premises of the brewer for sale or elsewhere, which is found on analysis of a sample thereof, at any time, to be of an original gravity not exceeding 1016 and of a strength not exceeding 1.2 per cent."
Time is now against me, but in a debate in the other place on 31 March 1988, Lord Lucas of Chilworth moved an amendment to the Licensing Bill which was similar to my Bill. The one area with which he did not deal was alcohol free clubs. If my Bill is passed such clubs would be allowed to open. Currently, we are forcing such clubs--clubs in the north of England are particularly anxious about this--to obtain a licence. That defeats the object they wish to achieve. At present retail outlets do not know whether it is legal to sell certain products because the production method may not be stated on the label.
I appreciate that we may be months away from new labelling legislation, which I would welcome. My Bill seeks to push us on to modern legislation a little quicker. As T.L. Peacock said in "Melincourt" :
"There are two reasons for drinking ; one is, when you are thirsty, to cure it ; the other, when you are not thirsty, to prevent it."
Column 542
The Bill will extend choice and introduce sense to the legislation on beverages. I commend it to the House.2.22 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for the Home Department (Mr. Douglas Hogg) : Time is short and therefore I shall be brief My hon. Friend the Member for York (Mr. Gregory) has explained the purposes of the Bill and I will not repeat them save to say that he is to be congratulated on bringing the Bill before the House. My hon. Friend is correct that there is a problem with the definition. There is considerable merit in the suggestion that the definition should be directed at the alcoholic content of the drink at the moment of sale and not at the process of manufacture, which is now the case. The House may adopt such an approach. If it does so, it must then consider the threshold at which the definition must bite. The Bill, as presently drafted, contemplates a definitional threshold of 1.2 per cent. by volume. The House may feel that that is too high and that some lower threshold is appropriate. That matter should be looked at on a subsequent occasion.
The Government are not opposed to the principle of the Bill ; nor would we oppose its Second Reading. However, we have considerable reservations about the threshold as presently reflected in the provisions of the Bill.
2.24 pm
Mr. Stuart Randall (Kingston upon Hull, West) : I too congratulate the hon. Member for York (Mr. Gregory) on introducing the Bill and providing the House with an opportunity to discuss a serious matter. I am also glad that the Minister has shown his support for the Bill in principle, although the Government are concerned about some technical matters, such as the levels of alcohol.
The 1964 Act, which the Bill aims to amend, is a complicated and thick piece of legislation. The definitions in the Act consist of two parts : the classes of liquors--referring to wines, spirits, beers and ciders--and the specific gravity. The 1964 Act was originally designed to ensure that when people bought drinks they were not watered down. The Bill provides the opportunity of moderating the consumption of drink. I am sure that all hon. Members will welcome the fact that people are being given the opportunity to choose which sort of drink to take.
The problems towards which the Bill is directed include those relating to young people when they go out together. A few weeks ago I saw a group of young students--sensible people--who wanted to go out for an evening. They all decided that they would go to a pub. I questioned them on this but they replied, "Where else can we go?" We seem to have a society where it is automatically assumed that if we want to go out, we go to a public house. When we arrive, there are compulsions and pressures to drink alcohol.
In light of the pressures that society has placed on young people it seems reasonable to ensure that they are given as wide a range of drinks as possible. I shall not expand on the way in which I should like pubs to change, because that would be wide of the Bill. We are talking about the levels of alcohol in the drinks on sale, in accordance with the Licensing Act 1964.
Column 543
Another matter that concerns all hon. Members is the crime-related aspect of drink. As the House will be well aware, there are record levels of crime in this country and much of it is carried out by young people. We also know that those crimes are often drink related. Women and elderly people are often frightened about going out late at night because they fear that people who have drunk too much will be on the rampage.Mr. Bermingham : Does my hon. Friend agree that the Minister made a valid and telling point when he raised the question of the level at which the alcohol-free symbol is used? Young children could be affected by 1.2 per cent. of alcohol.
Does my hon. Friend also agree that we must not only set the appropriate level but make it clear to the public at large that "alcohol free" may not mean "alcohol free", because some people who react to alcohol may be endangered by not understanding the real meaning of the phrase?
Mr. Randall : My hon. Friend makes a good point. We could mislead the public if drinks are not properly labelled. The Germans call drinks "alcohol frei". We must be careful because they are not always alcohol free.
I shall end now because other hon. Members want to speak. There is also a health aspect to this matter. The Opposition welcome the Bill and hope that it will have a speedy passage through the House. 2.29 pm
Sir Bernard Braine (Castle Point) : Common sense suggests that it must be socially desirable to increase the availability of low and non- alcoholic drinks, especially for drivers and young people, at a time of growing alcohol abuse.
The hon. Member for St. Helens, South (Mr. Bermingham) was absolutely right : the cut-off level of alcoholic content in the Bill, at 1.2 per cent., is far too high. There are good reasons-- It being half-past Two o'clock, the debate stood adjourned. Debate to be resumed on Friday 7 July.
Column 544
Private Members' BillsABORTION (TREATMENT OF NON-RESIDENT WOMEN) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 5 May.
INDECENT DISPLAYS (NEWSPAPERS AND WORKPLACES) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 14 April.
FUEL AND ENERGY PROVISION BILL Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 21 April.
PROTECTION OF RESIDENTS IN RETIREMENT HOMES BILL Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 21 April.
HOUSING THE HOMELESS BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 21 April.
PLANNING PERMISSION (DEMOLITION OF HOUSES) BILL Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 7 July.
ABORTION (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 5 May.
AGE OF LEGAL CAPACITY (SCOTLAND) BILL Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 14 April.
HOUSING ASSOCIATIONS (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) BILL Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 21 April.
FUNERAL INDUSTRY (CODE OF PRACTICE) BILL Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 21 April.
GAMING MACHINES (PROHIBITION ON USE BY PERSONS UNDER EIGHTEEN) BILL Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 14 April.
Column 545
LONDON GOVERNMENT BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 21 April.
HARE COURSING BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 5 May.
JUNIOR HOSPITAL DOCTORS (REGULATION OF HOURS) BILL [LORDS] Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 21 April.
Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover) : On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I have just been watching this procession of Bills. My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Hodge Hill (Mr. Davis) has moved the Second Reading of a Bill to reduce the number of hours that junior doctors work. The hon. Member for Watford (Mr. Garel-Jones), a Government Whip, objected to the Bill, which is terrible--
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Harold Walker) : Order. Be that as it may, the hon. Gentleman will have to wait until Second Reading to express his views. Nothing was out of order.
Mr. Terry Davis (Birmingham, Hodge Hill) : Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. This is an unusual situation. The Bill has already been passed in another place, where the Government neither opposed it nor objected to it. Is it not unusual for the Government to shelter behind procedure of this sort in order to thwart a worthwhile Bill's passage?
Mr. Deputy Speaker : Nothing out of order occurred.
RIDERS OF EQUINE ANIMALS (WEARING OF PROTECTIVE HEADGEAR) BILL Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 14 April.
Mr. Deputy Speaker : May I ask hon. Members to make their objections quite clear?
Column 546
COAL MINING SUBSIDENCE (DAMAGE, ARBITRATION, PREVENTION AND PUBLIC AWARENESS) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Second Reading deferred till Friday 21 April.
DATA PROTECTION
Ordered,
That the provisions of paragraph (2) of Standing Order No. 84 (Constitution of standing committees), paragraph (1) of Standing Order No. 86 (Nomination of standing committees) and Standing Order No. 101 (Standing Committees on Statutory Instruments, &c.) shall apply to the Pension Arrangement of the Data Protection Registrar as if it were a statutory instrument ; and that the said Pension Arrangement be referred to a Standing Committee on Statutory Instruments, &c.-- [Mr. Garel-Jones.]
Mr. Harry Greenway (Ealing, North) : On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I thought that I heard the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) object to the Riders of Equine Animals (Wearing of Protective Headgear) Bill, but he indicates that that was not the case. Would it be possible to put the Question again?
Mr. Deputy Speaker : I know not from whom the cry came, but the hon. Gentleman will recall that to put the matter beyond doubt I asked for confirmation that there was an objection and clearly received such confirmation. The hon. Gentleman will also recall that, in the light of that, I asked hon. Members to make their objections clear and beyond peradventure.
Mr. Gerald Bermingham (St. Helens, South) : On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. There was an objection to Bill No. 17 on the Order Paper. I promptly asked the Government Whips which one of them had done the dirty deed and they all denied it. As there was nobody else on the Bench, I should like to know who objected.
Mr. Deputy Speaker : I am surprised that hon. Members are able to tell me that they have been engaged in conversation across the Chamber while I am on my feet trying to conduct business. I heard the word "object" loud and clear, and we have passed on from that.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Ordered,
That, at the sitting on Wednesday 12 April, notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order No. 15 (Prayers against statutory instruments, &c. (negative procedure)), Motions in the name of Mr. Neil Kinnock relating to National Health Service and National Health Service (Scotland) may be proceeded with, though opposed, for three hours after the first of them has been entered upon ; and if proceedings thereon have not been previously disposed of, Mr. Speaker shall then put the Question already proposed from the Chair.-- [Mr. Garel-Jones.]
Column 547
Malta
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.-- [Mr. Garel-Jones.]
2.37 pm
Mr. Harry Barnes (Derbyshire, North-East) : In discussing our relations with Malta we are contrasting two very different nations. The differences are not just in size, climate, location, religion and life styles, because, related to those factors, there are deep economic and political differences. In this forum it is naturally the economic and political factors on which we should concentrate. Britain was the first country to industrialise and was the birthplace of fully-fledged capitalism. With such a position came the acquisition of an empire, including the establishment of a Crown colony in Malta in the early years of the 19th century. Although Britain developed its own vigorous trade union and Labour movement, the strength of competitive, individualistic and jingoistic ideas have always been strong here and have had a powerful impact on the norms and values of a wide section of working class people. Hence we have seen, at least temporarily, the triumph of Thatcherism entering into jingoistic activity in the Falklands and pushing forward the power of monopoly capitalism.
Malta is very different from us in such matters, although it has deep bonds with and affection for the British people, has English as one of its two languages and welcomes masses of British tourists to its shores. Everyone will remember its herioc struggle against Fascism in the second world war.
Throughout its history until recently it has been dominated by many outside forces, although those influences have all been assimilated in the rich intellectual and social culture of Malta. Nevertheless, it gained its independence from Britain only in 1964 and its status as a republic in 1974. That is only 25 and 15 years ago, respectively. Malta's struggle for independence was a struggle for democracy. It was a collective activity rather than a process of competitiveness, individuality and selfishness. People worked together rather than against one another.
There is much else about Malta that nurtures collectivism and co-operation. It is a small island about the size of my constituency and that means that the opportunities for direct and representative democracy are much greater than in Britain. Recently the Malta Labour party held rolling conferences to discuss the full agenda before it. Would that we could do that at Labour party conferences in this country.
The island's climate means that the two political parties hold regular rallies which achieve mass attendances. One in six of the island's population were present at a recent rally. The island's deep Catholic religion encourages festive, co-operative and social action as distinct from the Protestant and more individualistic religion which at one time dominated this nation.
Malta is littered with Labour and Nationalist clubs and, unlike Britain, is a highly politicised nation. Some 70 or 80 Labour clubs exist in Malta and Gozo. Even when Labour voters were threatened with hell and damnation by their Church hierarchy, the final stages of which threats took place between 1962 and 1966, they survived within a
Column 548
communal network and Labour later governed Malta from 1971 to 1987. It lost the 1987 election by only one seat.Over that time, Labour established a welfare state, made significant moves towards public ownership and worker self-management, especially in the important Malta dry docks, and increased the standard of living and social wage of working people considerably. The Labour party in this country looks with envy at the ability of the Malta Labour party to take almost, and sometimes more than, 50 per cent. of the votes. The Labour party in this country has never achieved that.
However, new forces are now threatening those achievements and the collective lifestyle that I have described. Those forces and Britain's role in assisting them worry me greatly. Malta has built up its economy on tourism associated with its considerable construction industry. Its one raw material is rock. It also has agriculture, fisheries, shipbuilding and a protected industrial capacity which must import its raw materials.
Malta is about to face a wave of corrupting, consumer-oriented, capitalist values. They come from outside television stations, especially from Sicily and Italy. They also come from the competitive values of tourism upon which Malta depends. For example, Malta feels strongly about nude bathing although that is imported into the area. Above all, Malta faces the power of international capital and overseas investment with links between this Government and Malta's Nationalist Government.
In an article in the Financial Times on 10 March 1988, commenting on the transfer of governmental power to the Nationalists, Mr. Richard Evans wrote :
"the economy is dominated by the public sector, which generates about 40 per cent. of the gross national product and employs 46 per cent. of the work force Malta's Prime Minister, Dr. Eddie Fenech Adami, would dearly like to grab Mrs. Thatcher's axe and wield it energetically."
I would like the Minister to explain whether policies which would seriously alienate half Malta's population are being encouraged and aided by the Government. Already the Nationalist Government's actions have led to widespread demonstrations and civil disobedience in Malta.
Conflict arose over the visit of the "Ark Royal" and other nuclear-capable ships to Malta. Demonstrations and blocking actions were organised by the General Workers' Union which organises 70 per cent. of the trade unionists in Malta. That action prevented the ships entering Valletta harbour. When the ships were turned away they anchored in an area known locally as the "Bay of Defeat" which gained its name at the end of the second world war when the Italian navy surrendered there.
Malta is an unaligned nation and if we examine its position on the map we will understand why that is a practical and pragmatic line for it to take and place in its constitution, as well as a morally correct stance. Will the Minister assure us that we will keep nuclear weapons away from Malta so that its position will not be compromised? Malta's non-alignment and neutrality could also be compromised by joining the European Community and joining a club associated with NATO. Its Nationalist Government is interested in Community membership.
A further difficulty with membership would be the free flow of goods, capital and labour into Malta when the country requires protection for its home industry to sell
| Next Section
| Home Page |