Death by a thousand cuts

Talking to several high-profile figures in the industry this past week has left me with the impression that this is undoubtedly the most difficult period for the pub trade within my own career — and theirs.

Certainly I have never experienced such a combination of adverse events, from the smoking ban to the economic downturn, coupled with the raft of new legislation, which threatens not only the errant pub operator but many well-meaning licensees as well.

I mentioned recently the frowns I meet in the bar. Sometimes, there is also a genuine fear, or even resignation, that their days in the trade are numbered. If the money men don't get you, then the police and licensing officers will.

There may be a vague hope that the population, faced with a recession, will find comfort in a drink at the pub. But some pundits claim, probably correctly, that the first thing to be hit when money is tight, is eating out and entertainment — two areas that the pub trade has tried to build up.

Returning for a moment to the yellow and red card scheme proposals, licensing minister Gerry Sutcliffe highlighted the fact that licence reviews have increased, and certainly there are indications that local authorities are being actively encouraged to hold reviews more often. But there is one problem about a direct appeal of this kind: local authorities themselves cannot initiate a review. It must come from one of the "responsible authorities", or from disgruntled neighbours.

Well of course, there have been a number of stories of close liaison between the relevant authorities, so that prompting for a review is made easier. Now comes the news from Kent that one local authority is to hold "evidence seminars" to give guidance to objectors on how to put together a case against a licensee.

We already know of examples where either the police or the local council have publicised an application in order to drum up representations. A number of local authorities, probably just within their remit, have also published guidelines for objectors, saying how they can put their views to the council.

But an actual seminar on objecting? This must be something of a first. Although the invitation appears to be addressed to the licensed trade as well as local people, it is clear from the subject matter that the object is to ensure that the kind of evidence put forward is valid, in the light of the Thwaites case, which held that fear, surmise and conjecture were not really the basis for taking action.

Licensed trade assault​

I am sure that the licensing officer concerned feels that this is part of the service that he gives to the community. But it does smack of partisanship, clearing the path for yet another assault on the licensed trade and, presumably, helping to raise the figures for reviews, which central Government will warmly applaud.

One of the central policy reasons for introducing licence reviews was that they provided a middle way between inaction and complete removal of the licence, which was seen as a flaw in the old system.

Yet all the talk is of review as a quick and easy way of revoking the premises licence, or of inflicting such controls and constraints on the operation of the premises that they will soon become unviable.

The situation has now become unbalanced, so that one or two complainants can have a devastating effect on the future prospects of a pub. In spite of the recent success in St Albans, there have been numerous less-publicised examples where additional conditions have been put on to licences simply to assuage a vociferous local resident.

Death by a thousand cuts? It's not a pretty sight.