Irresponsible promotions: I wish I knew what they mean

At the Morning Advertiser's Freehouse 500 seminar the other day I was taken to task for not being specific enough about what activities would constitute an "irresponsible promotion" under the Government's proportionate and targeted mandatory conditions, says Peter Coulson.

These, according to Lord Brett, have been warmly welcomed by everyone in the universe, which is strange because I thought that both the industry and the leading local authority body, the Local Government Association, were in accord for once that they were "a bad idea".

The reason why I could not produce a list, as I explained to my enquirer at the time, is that nobody knows exactly what such a promotion would consist of, or how it would be enforced, except a small group of beavers in a Home Office back room, who are now presumably putting together a set of examples of unacceptable behaviour that will tie in with the wording of the regulations.

According to Lord Brett, this will lead to the revised statutory Guidance giving a "clear indication" of what is and is not acceptable. It will be published in advance of the commencement date, which is set at 6 April, so they do not have very long to work on it.

If it does give such an indication, however, it will be a first. One of the main attributes of the Guidance in areas such as this is its ability to sit on the fence when it comes to really laying down the law. It shilly-shallied on what constituted incidental or background music, and also what constituted a minor variation. Why should you trust that it will know what an irresponsible drinks promotion is?

People have mentioned yards of ale and victorious rugby teams. Drink is, like it or not, an inherent part of a celebration, which may well involve stepping outside the norm. The borderline between what constitutes good fun and something that could be considered irresponsible by the provider (not the drinker) is difficult to define.

This is the problem about having a policy, which the Home Office clearly does, actively discouraging the enjoyment of alcohol and then trying to codify it. It is where the beavers — all top university graduates who, therefore, presumably never touched a drop in their lives — have to earn their keep. So as soon as I have an indication of what these clever chaps think about promotions involving alcohol, I shall let you know.

Q&A​

Total ban on under-16s​

Q.​ We have been told that under-16s unaccompanied by a parent or guardian are banned from all parts of our premises, even the garden, as alcohol is consumed there. Sometimes we have groups of youngsters, but we always ask for ID and do not serve when in any doubt. Is it true that we must comply with this overall ban?

A.​ You do not indicate who gave you this instruction, but from what you say it sounds as if it is an official warning. But it is not correct in several respects.

First of all, the Licensing Act says nothing about "parent or guardian". It is true that there is a specific ban on allowing unaccompanied children under 16, but this is defined as meaning "not in the company of an individual aged 18 or over." That is a general requirement and would be perfectly well served if you had asked for ID from a member of the group, which showed that they were over 18.

Secondly, the prohibition on unaccompanied children only applies to specific parts of the premises (or to the whole premises, only between midnight and 5am). The specified part is one that is used "exclusively or primarily" for the supply of alcohol for consumption on the premises, which has been generally accepted to mean the bar area. The garden of a pub is not used for the supply of alcohol, and, therefore, the restriction would not apply there.

I can understand if the police were concerned about young people congregating in a pub garden and drinking alcohol purchased by adults. But that is a separate issue and is part of your supervisory responsibility. There is no question of a total ban, unless it is made a condition of your licence.

TEN on display​

Q.​ Someone from the local police said that if we ran a temporary event at the pub I was obliged to post up the notice in the bar for everyone to see. It has a number of personal details on the form.

Is this a legal requirement?

A.​ It isn't, but there have been several examples of this being suggested as a legal requirement. Because of the details contained, it is a clear invasion of privacy and should be avoided. There is a standard form, issued by the Department for Culture, Media & Sport, which is being used by most local authorities. This is to provide a way of checking the identity of those, not just in the licensed trade, but members of the public who are also allowed to apply.

The Licensing Act 2003 gives alternatives. You can either post up the acknowledged notice itself, if you are happy to do so, or you can keep the notice in a safe place if you are running the event personally.

Unstamped glasses​

Q.​ I work as steward in a sports and social club. A colleague in the licensed trade has told me that we should not be using unstamped glasses in this club. Would I be taken to court if the glasses were illegal?

A.​ There is in fact no requirement for clubs with a premises certificate to have Government-stamped measuring equipment, because the transaction that takes place there is not "sale by retail" under weights and measures legislation.

The situation is entirely different from a pub, where the customer is entitled to receive a full measure in accordance with trading standards law. The licensee must comply with all the rules on measuring instruments and full measure, because the law requires that the customer must obtain what he contracts to obtain, and no less.

Members' clubs do not "sell by retail" and, therefore, the rules governing measuring do not directly apply to them. However, most clubs use accurate measuring equipment for stock control purposes and to avoid fraud or dishonesty, and most members would expect to receive full measure in their own club.