I beg to move, in page 6, line 30, to leave out from "section," to "shall," in line 32, and to insert:
The purpose of this Amendment, together with the Amendment to page 6, line 35, is to clear up a point which emerged on further examination of subsection (3) of this Clause. Clause 12 provides for transferring to county councils the duties of licences for hawkers, moneylenders, pawnbrokers and refreshment housekeepers. Under subsection (3) of this Clause it is provided that the licences are to remain in force for one year instead of expiring, as they did previously, on fixed dates; and therefore, a trader taking out a licence for the first time would, under the subsection as it now stands, have to take out a first licence for one year instead of for the period to the next fixed date. The effect of this Amendment is that in the case of moneylenders and refreshment house keepers the licences will continue to run from fixed dates instead of running for a year from the date when they are taken out. We have made this change because we saw on re-examination that the Clause in the form in which it had been introduced would have imposed charge on the subject, so far as moneylenders and refreshment house keepers were concerned, because it is possible that the holder of a full-year licence under the new system might conceivably die during the course of the year. It could be argued that if he did die during that period he would have to pay a larger sum than he would have done—"for the purposes of the Hawkers Act, 1888, or the Pawnbrokers Act, 1872."
He surely could not then have been in any position to pay anything?
That may be so; but he would have paid when alive a larger sum than he would have done under the present system. For that technical reason, it was held, I believe correctly, that this provision imposed a charge on the subject, and as we did not include in the Budget a resolution empowering us to do this, subsection (3) was technically out of Order. This amendment simply deletes that part of the subsection; it does not, in fact, cause any major inconvenience because it is not proposed to transfer licence duties to local authorities before April next, and so there will be time to deal with this matter in the future.
2.45 a.m.
This rather technical point appears to leave the taxpayer in a slightly better position but I did not quite understand the force of the hon. Gentleman's final remark. He said that as the transfer to the local authorities does not take place until April there will be time to deal with this matter. Does he mean that it is the intention of the Government in next year's Bill to re-introduce this Clause as it was, after first having taken the precaution of a Ways and Means Resolution?
What I meant to imply was that it would be open to us to do so if we wished.
Amendment agreed to.
Further Amendment made: In page 6, line 35, leave out from "time," to the end of line 44.—[ Mr. Jay.]
Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.