Councils hold all the aces
You can take no comfort from the possible effect of the latest Home Office roadshows, which have been taking place in various parts of the country, on radical changes to the Licensing Act.
From the reports I have received, it would appear that they were not engaged in a debate about the merits or otherwise of the proposed measures.
They were concerned with any problems that might occur over implementation, together with the level of penalties that could be inflicted on the licensed trade.
The brevity of the consultation has already been widely noted. What the trade has to do now is to assess the potential damage that the measures will do, both in terms of finance and hours of trading. There is a fairly gloomy scenario, it seems.
The first thing to note is that power has been shifted almost entirely to the local council to decide on most licensing issues. It can initiate reviews itself, control hours, does not have to "prove" that what it is doing is of benefit to the licensing objectives and, if there is a hint of trouble or resistance to its views, it can remove the licence entirely.
This was not what the original Licensing Act intended, of course, which is why there is such disquiet at the way the legislation is being changed.
Basically, the proposals aim to cut out most of the checks and balances that allowed applicants or operators to plead their case and ask for evidence. Instead, it will be local councils who call the shots — if they do not like your operation then they appear to be at liberty to ensure that you do not operate.
It is interesting to note that trade lawyers are at the forefront of the protests, perceiving as they do an erosion of the important balance between the needs of operators and those of the community, or, more particularly, the town hall.
There is no doubt they will be very busy when (not if) these proposals go ahead, but that has not stopped them from suggesting this is not a balancing act, as the Government has suggested, but a lurch to one side, giving an unprecedented power to the local authority and trying to curtail the ability of the trade to protest legally in any meaningful way.
Fee rise
From the financial point of view, it is likely that fees will rise dramatically in some areas if full cost recovery is brought in. London is likely to see some of the biggest hikes, but other cities that have protested at fee levels will use the new powers. It has to be remembered that the cost of a public entertainment licence in Westminster ran into thousands of pounds annually for some of the larger venues and hotels, and those days could well return. This will be coupled with extinguishment of the licence if the payment is just one day late — an event that certainly happened under the old PEL system. It is to be hoped that the proposal for "voluntary" closing (for selling alcohol to a minor twice in three months) to be extended from 48 hours to two weeks will not be taken up.
This could in itself signal the end of a business and it is totally disproportionate, given the number of sales made by many venues throughout the year. The fact that the police can issue such a notice without going to court has always been a source of discomfort, but two weeks will make a court appearance potentially a
better bet.
Hard times. The announced delay in implementation will not make this bitter pill any easier to swallow.
