Controlled at every turn

Some commentators seem to think the industry has "got off lightly" with the proposed set of conditions that Home Secretary Jacqui Smith intends to add to premises licences.

This just shows how far the bunker mentality has permeated the licensed trade. Thrashed within an inch of its life, it still thinks it could have been worse!

I have been re-reading some of the comments I made at the time the new Licensing Act was beginning to take effect. I noted then — as I do now — that conditions were the key to the whole system and would not just spell out the nature of the business (as was the intention) but would be used to control the entire operation of outlets. This is becoming ever more true.

But it is not just from external sources that the problems arise. It is quite possible to shoot yourself in the foot on the application form itself.

Variation of a licence might seem like a good idea, until one sees what can happen if you give hostages to fortune on the application form.

I should like to quote again from guidance prepared by one enlightened local authority that tells the true story:

"Whatever you write in an application box to show your 'intention' will be turned automatically into a legally binding condition. Any of these conditions could form the basis for legal action against you in the future, possibly resulting in the loss of your licence. You must think very carefully before volunteering to be bound by any such condition..."

It used to be the case under the old law that where an application was made for a new licence, the police came up with a whole set of suggested conditions — often at the last moment — most of them aimed, it seems to me, at strangling the licence at birth. The same appears to be possible under the new variation procedure, only in this case it is the licensee probably strangling himself.

As the above guidance points out, this application form is not a survey. You are being invited to write your own rules and will then be bound by them.

Nowhere is this more obvious than in section P. This is the section where you have to write in five separate boxes the steps you intend to take in order to promote the licensing objectives. Again, this is a compulsory section — you "fail" if you do not write in this section and the application is invalid. However, as the Guidance points out, it is perfectly acceptable to write that current safeguards are considered adequate in respect of the variation. Whether the responsible authorities will think so, of course, is another matter.

But what you do write in this section will be turned into conditions. You should not use it to give pledges, like politicians. You should understand that what you write here will be binding on you. So if you undertake to have "constant supervision" of the toilets or the entrance to the premises and you breach that, you are committing an offence.

All this means that you must take some advice before writing in any of these boxes, and in the sections covering hours of sale and, in particular, hours of opening. While I am aware that many local authorities will be prepared to help applicants to complete their forms, it seems to me far better to have professional help with them, because the experience that a good solicitor can bring to the application process is invaluable.

Whatever conditions are added will stay there for the life of the licence. They are unlikely to be toned down or removed, especially in the current climate.