Licensing regime defended

The new licensing regime has been fiercely defended by the senior civil servant who heads up licensing at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS).

Andrew Cunningham was responding to complaints that the forms for the new licences were too long, and that the date for the second appointed day, by which time the new regime takes full effect, has still not been set.

Mr Cunningham claimed that making the forms longer actually made them simpler for licensees to fill out. "Making the application forms simpler puts a greater burden on the applicant to explain themselves," he told delegates at a London conference. "The longer it is the more you can go for the tick box approach - there is also a range of literacy and language issues to consider."

Mr Cunningham said the DCMS was still working on the theory that November 7 2005 - which falls exactly nine months after the first appointed day in January, when licensees can start applying for new licences - would be the date of the second appointed day.

"The only reason it has not been published is that ministers prefer not to do these things too far in advance in case something else happens on that day," he said.

Patrick Crowley, licensing team manager for the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea - and a member of the DCMS advisory panel on the act - urged the government to get on and set the date.

Announcing the second appointed day before the first appointed day would enable local authorities to ask licensees for a pro-rata Public Entertainment Licence (PEL) next year. "Otherwise we will have to put more resources into paying back a proportion of it," said Mr Crowley.