Night-time legacy
The local authority has to devise a scheme, go through a maze of exemptions, set up a charging department and checking system, send out numerous extra bits of paper, collect the money, send out reminders and at the end of the day hand over no less than 70% of what they garner to someone else’s budget.
Sounds a bit like slave labour to me! Sensible authorities probably will not touch it.
While it is not unknown for private enterprise to pay for extra policing (football stadia and pop festivals are good examples), it is usually for an ascertainable reason, and there are parameters laid down in case law to rule on what can be charged for.
The basic principle followed by the courts is that the police are there to ‘police’ society, whatever it may get up to, and it is central government that pays for it.
This administration is flying in the face of that principle by suggesting that those legally trading on a daily basis in towns and cities, paying rates and taxes like any other business, can be subject to an additional tax, simply because people stay out late.
It is not surprising that the police come up with a raft of reasons why the levy will assist them. But they would, wouldn’t they? If I were asked to justify receiving extra cash, I could think of lots of reasons.
They are being squeezed by central government financially, just like other sectors. An injection of money without any extra effort on their part seems like a very good idea.
However it is dressed up, the levy is a general tax. It also creates a worrying precedent for the future. How many different ways can you think of that central government could start charging individual operators for their business requirements?
Instead of a general rate, applicable to all, you create special rates for categories. Next time central government needs to devolve another kind of expense, it just targets another trading sector to pay for it.
But it is perhaps too late in the day to start complaining about this measure. It has already reached the statute book, even if it has not been implemented yet.
The late-night levy has been described by several ministers as a ‘tool’ for local authorities to use if they deem it necessary. This is exactly how alcohol disorder zones were described, and it was very clear that every council in the country was going to leave them in the tool-shed!
But I wonder how much pressure councillors will come under from the police to implement the levy? Or how much influence the newly elected police chiefs will have on the issue? We assume that the decision will be taken in the town hall, free from undue influence.
But campaigning has started and will continue, even if there is initial reluctance. A couple of incidents of street disorder and the local press might well get in on the act, demanding that the ‘polluters’ — the pub trade — pay for clearing up the mess.
It would not be sensible to assume that the initial reluctance that has been expressed by many local authorities will remain in place forever. Which means that the licensed trade must continue to express its views that the levy is a completely unfair measure, targeting the innocent as well as the guilty, to pay for something which is the responsibility of the police in any case.
