Coulson: Three years on: is it slow progress or no progress?

You may remember that the new licensing laws came into effect in November 2005.

This means that towards the end of this year we shall notch up three years under the new regime.

The reason for marking this event is that three years is an important milestone in licensing: local authority policies have to be reviewed every three years, and, according to Sir Les Elton, fee levels should also be reviewed in that timescale.

Remember what he said in his report about licensing funding as long ago as December 2006?

It was as follows: "We have concluded that the total that should be funded is £43m for the three-year period 2004/05 to 2006/07 and that this sum should be met by central Government. For future fees, we are recommending an increase to the current fees of 7% for the three-year period 2007/08 to 2009/10."​

That was pretty specific. Sir Les also made a number of other recommendations about the way in which licensing should be administered.

But his main remit was to advise the Department for Culture Media & Sport (DCMS) on the fee structure and the support for licensing administration.

What has the DCMS done about this report and its findings?

Absolutely nothing.

Remember that this was an independent review, much heralded at the time by ministers as a way of ensuring fairness and impartiality in the setting of fees. You would have thought that, given the lapse of time, these ministers (all of whom are different now, by the way) would have come up with some moves on the key elements, or at least would have given the licensed trade some idea of what sort of fees they could expect in the future.

In case his halo is slipping, Licensing Minister Gerry Sutcliffe could take the lead on this, and at least ask the besieged Chancellor Alistair Darling, in a quiet moment, whether the £43m ever found its way into local Government.

There were a number of other sensible suggestions and proposals in the Elton report, which could have been brought forward, and certainly they were mentioned in the simplification plans trotted out by the DCMS to meet the Prime Minister's requirements.

All talk and no action​

But the main problem is that this department is all talk and no action. It seems to take it years actually to do anything, and meanwhile costs go spiralling upwards — remember, it is in charge of the Olympics, which is due to be held in 2012 but may have to be postponed...

I may sound glib about this, but it is both disappointing and frustrating in this climate of anti-trade feeling stoked by the Department of Health and the Home Office, that positive moves on licensed trade matters are left in the doldrums while they have time to strengthen the laws on police powers, closure orders and under-age sales. It is all one way.

With the greatest respect to Saint Gerry, his department is not at the cutting edge of politics and does not have much clout.

But at least they could make a bit of noise about the fact that a specific financial proposal has been left on the back burner for so long, and leaves the trade wondering what will happen next.

Of course, in one way the delay is beneficial. Fees have not risen at the time suggested, which in these cash-strapped times is a good thing. But the down side is that they may well be raised above the Elton recommended rate to make up for this.

Above all, the silence is unnerving. They should be pushed into making a response to the Elton Report without any further delay.