Legal advice: It's time to come clean on licensing

Licensees need a clear statement on the timing of the Licensing Act.

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

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) website, now says that it is "estimated" that the final draft guidance under the Licensing Act 2003 will be presented to Parliament for approval by both Houses in "spring 2004".

Perhaps the author of the webpage would have been better advised to leave out "2004"? That way, at least the government would have left its options rather more open. Why has the DCMS changed its forecast from the previously rather more precise (but nevertheless hopelessly optimistic) February 2004? And remember, before that, we were told that the final draft of the guidance was going to be published in September of last year.

It seems the DCMS minister responsible for licensing, Richard Caborn, has seen his hopes dashed for publication of the guidance in mid-March. What is becoming clear is that there is considerable substance to the rumours which have been circulating to the effect that the Home Office has been blocking progress of the guidance and the secondary legislation, with its view that the provisions of the Licensing Act 2003 will make existing alcohol-related problems worse, rather than better.

What is now desperately needed is someone from within the government to put his head above the parapet and let us all know what exactly is going on. Is there any truth to the rumour that implementation of the Act will be delayed until after the next general election, whenever that will be?

We are certainly getting mixed, albeit possibly unofficial, messages at the moment and licensees are becoming discontented.

On the one hand Richard Caborn told The Publican that: "Broadly speaking 99.9 per cent of publicans do act very responsibly and they keep their house in order," (The Publican, March 8 2004). However, The Sunday Times reported on March 14 that leaked Home Office documents claim that "in some areas it is starting to look as though the number of problem premises is outstripping those being responsibly run".

Richard Caborn reassured Publican readers that the DCMS is "the department that represents the industry and we are putting its case very forcibly in Whitehall". However, The Sunday Times suggested that David Blunkett, the Home Secretary, wants:

• new powers to charge pubs and clubs for policing
• to fix alcohol prices in city centres to cut drinking
• councils to refuse all new licences to premises unless the applicants prove that they will not increase anti-social behaviour.

The Sunday Times report went on to say: "The Home Secretary may even consider stopping people from drinking while standing," and that Mr Caborn has written to Mr Blunkett "warning him that his attitude was damaging the passage of the new law".

We need the government to come clean about its intentions in the event that voluntary measures in the strategy fail to resolve the problems of alcohol abuse. In short, what is the hidden agenda? The industry has a right to know.