Q&A: Gerry Sutcliffe on licensing improvements

MINOR VARIATIONS AND LICENSING REFORM

1) How do you respond to concerns that the minor variation reform is flawed because it will lead to inconsistencies between councils and misunderstanding from residents?​

The Minor Variations process is intended to give councils some flexibility to take local factors into account when considering these small changes to licences. However, alcohol related variations are excluded from the new process and detailed statutory Guidance should ensure a broadly consistent approach. We would expect councils to explain the new process to residents on their websites and, eventually, in their licensing policy statements so that they are clear about what is involved.

2) Do you agree that the reform won't be effective until later than intended in some areas because the relevant officer won't necessarily have been delegated the correct powers​

No. We have recommended to councils that delegating this power to a licensing officer would be a good and cost-effective way of handling Minor Variation applications. But if councils have not yet delegated powers (or are unwilling to do so), these applications must be considered by the council's Licensing Committee or Sub-Committee within the statutory timescales.

3) Will the intervention of Parliamentary committees, which insisted on public consultation for minor variations, have an impact on the effectiveness of the reform?​

No. The requirement to advertise minor variations (on a white notice) will give residents a chance to raise any concerns and licensing officers will have to take these into account in reaching a decision. But there is no requirement to hold a hearing and we expect that the majority of genuinely 'minor' variations will not result in representations.

4) Are there plans for further reform of licensing; for example, electronic application forms?​

Yes. The Government will consult in the Autumn on proposals to allow fully electronic applications and notifications under the Licensing Act 2003. This has the potential to save applicants considerable time and money and, when combined with other measures, such as Minor Variations, will mean that the licensing regime will have been made significantly easier this year.

5) Would you consider a new licensing objective of public health, as suggested by the Welsh Assembly?​

The Government shares the concerns of the Welsh Assembly about the health impacts of alcohol misuse. However, our position is that the Licensing Act is there to control and regulate the sale of alcohol, not its consumption. Alcohol can still be consumed in hazardous quantities in ways well beyond the scope of the Act, such as at home, private parties, on the streets, etc. Health problems associated with alcohol are complex issues which are more appropriately being dealt with through the Government's overall strategy for reducing alcohol-related harm.

As I said to the Health Select Committee on 16 July, it is not entirely clear exactly what would be achieved by having public health as licensing objective that could not be delivered through other legislation, partnership working, the use of early interventions, education and encouraging personal and parental responsibility.

6) Are there any plans to put licensing back in control of the Home Office, seeing as most activity in this area in recent years has originated from that department (eg: ADZs, the mandatory alcohol retailing code)?​

Machinery of Government changes are entirely a matter for the Prime Minister. The prevention of Crime and Disorder is, of course, one of the four licensing objectives and it is entirely right that the Home Office has an interest in the Licensing Act. But this is no different to, say, DEFRA's interest in the Public Nuisance objective which led to them extending the Noise Act to Temporary Event Notices in 2005. And, of course, such policy decisions are agreed across Government.

LIVE MUSIC​

7) Will you reconsider reforming licensing of live music - for example, by re-introducing the two-in-a-bar rule and having exemptions for small-scale venues - after the criticisms from music campaigners and MPs?

It is sometimes forgotten that the two in a bar rule was disliked by many musicians as it favoured one or two performers over groups. Recent evidence suggests that live music is thriving and in 2008-09 there was a 7% increase in the number of premises licensed to put on live acts. I am aware that some people have expressed concerns that some pubs which used to put on small gigs may have stopped doing so. It is difficult to define a meaningful exemption that retains the necessary public protection. Instead, we are working with local government, the pub trade and the Musicians Union to ensure the exemption for incidental music is fully used and to promote the new minor variations process. Live music is a good way to attract customers and I hope that more premises will consider doing so.

ENFORCEMENT​

8) Last year you wrote to councils urging them to adopt a yellow and red card scheme for tackling problem premises (yellow on first review, licence revocation on the second). A range of tough conditions were also proposed for venues on a first review. Do you think this has encouraged enforcement agencies to seek more reviews and carry out more enforcement?

We are currently collecting figures from licensing authorities for our next statistical bulletin and I will be interested to see the figures on reviews. It is important to remember that the yellow and red card approach is aimed at poorly performing premises and I would therefore not expect it to be used in huge numbers.

However, we have some feedback that police have found it a very useful approach and I will be writing to Local Authorities over the summer to remind them of the value of the scheme.

9) Do you think some councils and police are over-stepping the mark when it comes to enforcement? For example, insisting on blanket conditions such as CCTV and polycarbonate glasses.​

A key principle of the Licensing Act is that premises should be considered on a case by case basis. We recognise there may be an issue where problems in an area cannot be attributed to a particular premises: that is why the proposed mandatory code suggests certain conditions that could, in some circumstances, be applied to groups of premises. But we have made it very clear that such an approach would still need to pass the tests of being necessary, proportionate and appropriate to tackle an identified problem.

The Local Better Regulation Office is looking at alcohol licensing in relation to minimising unnecessary inconsistency and in line with better regulation principles.

10) What's your view of the approach of Trading Standards in Oldham - calling for blanket licences reviews at all town-centre bars to force hard-line restrictions on trading, including "post office-style" queues? Will you be speaking to the council or trading standards in Oldham about the matter?​

Parliament has delegated licensing decisions to local government and it would be inappropriate for me to interfere. Any actions under the Licensing Act must be necessary, and proportionate to tackle an identified risk to the licensing objectives. An appeal route exists for where licence holders wish to challenge Licensing Authority formally and, as local businesses, they can also raise concerns with their Local Councillors.

FEES​

11) When can the trade expect a decision on whether to alter licence fee levels?

The Government hopes to reach a decision on fees very soon.

12) Why has there been such a delay in announcing the levels?​

This is a complex issue requiring cross-Government agreement. We have to find the right balance between minimising burdens and costs to those