The second reading of the Licensing Bill

Further details on issues raised from the Licensing Bill

by David Clifton of thePublican.com's legal team of experts from London solicitors Joelson Wilson​

The second reading of the Licensing Bill took place in the House of Commons on March 24. I sat in the Strangers Gallery and watched as the debate unfolded. It was fascinating to listen to the issues that appeared to trouble MPs most.

Concerns were expressed as to the possible effect of the bill on activities as diverse as internet cafés, Scottish country dancing clubs, brass bands, morris dancing, Caravan Club rallies and the West Country tradition of wassailing. We even heard a complaint about the non-effect of the bill on motocross championships.

However, the words uttered by Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport Tessa Jowell (pictured)​, were those that I was waiting to hear.

She acknowledged some failing in the process adopted for the bill's progress through Parliament, saying that it would have been highly desirable for it to have had pre-legislative scrutiny to expose moral and ethical issues to greater examination at an earlier stage.

I understand the government intends to adopt such a course of action for the Gambling Bill, expected to be announced in the Queen's Speech in November.

She described the Licensing Bill as having to "walk the tightrope between liberalisation and laissez-faire", identifying the following as key questions to be addressed by the legislation:

• how can we increase choice without harming the peace of residents and communities?
• how can we keep red tape to a minimum?
• how can we keep important industries competitive?
• how can we avoid well-meaning interference in people's private choices?
• how can we do all that while protecting the vulnerable, the young and the wider public interest?

The opposition spokesman John Whittingdale expressed concern that the bill would add to red tape and not reduce it. He was also not slow to point out that in the House of Lords, the government was defeated nine times and was forced to make seven major concessions. Tessa Jowell said that despite their defeats in the Lords, the government would uphold the amendments:

• to include all incidental music as exempt (but not, it seems, the amendment exempting unamplified music)
• to exempt educational establishments.

However, she made it clear that the government would seek to overturn or amend others, including:

• substitution of "protection of amenity" for "prevention of public nuisance" as a licensing objective
• allowing a licensing authority to refuse a licence in the absence of objections.

It was Tessa Jowell's comments about children in pubs that made the newspaper headlines. The government intends:

• to give licensing authorities detailed guidance about types of licensed premises and the circumstances in which children will be allowed access to them
• to add local area child protection committees to the list of statutory consultees
• not to put a specific age limit on unsupervised access to licensed premises but to tighten up the existing rules on under-age drinking.

Directly contrasting views were expressed by MPs on the merits or otherwise of 24-hour licensing, transfer of responsibility from magistrates to local authorities, whether a licence should be required for the screening of televised football matches in pubs and whether the bill will sound the death knell for live music.

Debate also took place as to whether stronger safeguards are needed to prevent over-saturation of licensed premises. MPs recounted their experience of nightlife in towns and cities as diverse as Manchester, Loughborough, Rugby, Watford, Newcastle-on Tyne, Leeds, Barnsley, Reading, Romford and Swindon.

Tessa Jowell stated that local licensing policies will be able to make it clear that in certain areas there will be a presumption against grant of any more licences of a particular and specific type.

Also worthy of note was the comment by Westminster's MP that public transport "must in part be the responsibility of the huge entertainment industry, because without improvements in that infrastructure there should be no extension to licensing hours".

What's next? Members of the relevant standing committee have been appointed and will meet on nine days between April 1 and May 20 to consider the bill in detail. We will keep you posted.