Shutting pubs is a last resort
Some clarification appears to be needed about whether a local council has the power to close down a pub "on the spot" for licensing offences.
The proposal, put forward in Colchester, Essex, has been described as "headline grabbing" and it certainly is that — but for all the wrong reasons.
It sometimes seems that the licensed trade is treated by politicians as an industry apart from all others, so that you can ride roughshod over basic rights in the name of a clean-up campaign.
Shutting someone's business immediately should be a last resort, if it poses an imminent risk to the health and safety of the public.
Keeping them shut as a "penalty" is disproportionate: the cost to the business of being closed for an extended period far exceeds in financial terms the cost of even the highest fine levied in the magistrates' court for licensing misdemeanours.
The idea that you can take someone's livelihood away without going through the due process has gained too much credibility these days.
It is time that local councillors thought about the consequences of what they propose before they speak — but then that is yet another dream that will never be fulfilled!
It is perfectly true that premises can be closed on the spot. There are two examples that may affect the trade. The first is a food safety issue, where the state of the premises poses an immediate risk to health. Restaurants, takeaways and even pubs have been closed when serious unhygienic conditions that could result in food poisoning were discovered.
No-one is exempt — even the great Heston Blumenthal suffered such a closure at his famous restaurant in Bray, Berkshire.
The second is where there is an imminent risk of serious disorder on, or around, the premises. The police may issue a closure order under section 161 of the Licensing Act for a period of up to 24 hours or until the trouble disappears.
The order must be signed by an inspector or senior police officer, but it can be served by any constable on any person having charge of the premises at the time, and they must comply with it or risk prosecution and a fine of up to £20,000. Such an order can be extended, but only if the trouble persists.
Two-strikes
Contrary to the views of some police forces, it is not possible to order instant closure for minor breaches of licensing conditions — they actually need a magistrates' order to enforce such a closure.
They can issue a notice saying the premises will be closed unless the defect or wrong behaviour is rectified, but they have no power to shut a pub on the spot simply because the CCTV is not working properly in one area.
It would require a change in the licensing laws for a local authority to be able to order a pub to close for under-age selling or serving drunks, as has been suggested. First of all, these are criminal offences which need to be examined by a magistrate. Even where the "two strikes" rule is used by the police, they have to give the licensee the option of closing for 48 hours at a time not earlier than 14 days after the giving of the notice under section 169A. So again this is not instantaneous.
All councils can do is to act against a pub on receipt of a request for a review — they cannot currently start a review themselves.
They do have closure powers then, but it will take some time before such a closure comes into effect, and the pub can appeal to the magistrates in any event.
