Licensing Bill amendments

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

I wrote on this site on April 22 about the scrutiny of the Licensing Bill by a House of Commons standing committee, which will continue its debate until May 20.

I can now report that all of the amendments that were introduced by the opposition in the Lords have been overturned with the following results:

• Regulated entertainment:​ the Lords had exempted all acoustic entertainment and entertainment to less than 250 people which finished before 11.30pm. These amendments have been overturned, however "incidental" live or recorded music is exempted. But what is "incidental"? Apparently this will be a matter for the courts to decide

Central licensing authority:​ the government has rejected the idea of a central licensing authority to administer all personal licences. It has indicated support in principle for a national database but there is no real likelihood of this being in place before the transitional period starts

Public nuisance/public amenity:​ prevention of public nuisance has been reinstated as a licensing objective in place of "protection of public amenity"

Property owners registering interest in a premises licence:​ the government has rejected any register of interests on the basis that such a register would damage tenants' interests - but only by a narrow vote and some change may possibly still occur

Political objections:​ it was generally agreed that local councillors, MPs and MEPs should not be able to object in their own right to licensing applications (as opposed to making representations on behalf of their constituents)

Children:​ Lords' amendments prohibiting access to pubs by (and selling alcohol in the presence of) unaccompanied under 14-year-olds were overturned but new proposals have been put forward designed to provide additional protection for children.

Other important issues have not been put to a vote and further industry lobbying continues.

The existing clauses dealing with provisional licences (to be renamed provisional statements) were approved without any debate due to lack of time and application of the Parliamentary guillotine. This has raised industry concerns that the government may not be as sympathetic as it had previously indicated to a compromise that would have seen the conversion of provisional statements to premises licences made automatic if the development was completed within three years from grant.

The tone of the standing committee debates has seen the importance to the local community of the rural pub counter-balance arguments about excess alcohol consumption in town centre pubs and clubs that dominated much of the debate in the House of Lords. But recent publication of research analysis in relation to the National Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy may serve to focus attention on this once more.