REDUCTION MADE EASY

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XII, Issue 703, 27 August 1903, Page 20

REDUCTION MADE EASY

SOUND AND WORKABLE SCHEME

OF COMPENSATION.

(London “L.V. Gazette.”)

(Conclusion.)

These alternative solutions are so full of i-ound commonsense anjl practicability that we earnestly commend them to the )Sriou» consideration of the Government. By fixity of tenure Mr Tripp does not advocate the creation nor the rec ognition Of-' 1 »bsolut(^y-,impregnable rights. His. proNogal, briefly stated, is that all existing Reuses should be put ipon the same prying as the ante 18(19 beerhouses, and boula only be forfeited upon one or more rf the four. grounds specified in the Act Aitha* year,.-and fur ler that no new liKeßse should be granted for a term of ■tars without at least two old licensee Ka surrendered foK- esfch new.’ license grantWA)- ■'<.W ■ H > is .objected . thatv under,..this? x E]£tM the reduction in the number of HLddtto'houaea would not be effected with

sufficient rapidity to satisfy the new idea of the justices, the alternative proposal could be adopted. This scheme contains two provisions : First, that no new license should be granted for a given period of (say) seven years except in new districts;* and to meet admitted requirements, and in each case the new license should be granted only upon the surrender of three old ones Within the radius of any county. Secondly, that no license should he taken away for misconduct unless full and adequate compensation be given to all interested. 4 But, it may be argued, this latter scheme brings us up against the question which has all along proved the crux and the stumbling block of the whole problem —how is the compensation to be raised ? Mr Tripp replies to both these queries with confidence and cogency. He echoes the fact that has often been referred to in these columns, that since the passing of Lord Goschen’s Act, in 1890. about £440,000 has been annually raised for compensation purposes and applied to other uses ;' but he dismisses the idea of endeavouring to seek restitution of this quite adequate sum on tlje ground of its impracticability. But he turns instead to the temporary war tax of is per barrel on beer and fid per gallon on spirits—taxes which were levied for specific purposes, and have remained in force for reasons that are not so conspicuous. This tax must sooner or later be repealed, and Mr Tripp recommends, as soon as this desideratum has been accomplished, that, “ in order to have the matter settled once and for all, and to assist the Government in dealing with this thorny matter, a special compensation tax be imposed of, say. 3d per barrel on beer and 3d per gallon on spirits, such taxes to be paid solely to j fonn the nucleus of a genuine compensation fund.” This combined tax —one half of which would fall upon the brewers and the remainder upon the drinkers of spirits —would bring in £900,000 a year, and would in seven years yield an aggregate that would secure the purchase of all the so-called, superfluous licenses. This scheme presupposes the early repeal of the war • tax,- which, considering that the war has now been over for many months, is not too much to anticipate. It is, in any case, reasonable to suppose that the Government would not attempt, to impose a furthest charge upon the Trade while the present war tax is in existence. When this is taken off it will be time to consider Mr Tripp’s further suggestions as to the allocation the funds. As these are merely matters of detail, and are, in our opinian, open to debate, they may be safely shelved until their consideration is a matter of more immediate moment.