Recent comments and indeed the comprehensive London nightlife taskforce report are positive and redressing the balance.
I do not want to embark on another rant about cases where residents and Residents Associations have been able, with the support of local councillors, to restrict leisure operators in a way that must have had an adverse effect on the local economy.
This is nothing to do with a local resident being able, rightly, to avoid being disturbed by a thoughtless and poor quality venue but can it be right that a Residents Association can object to an application for later hours on policy grounds, as the only objector, without any one individual resident being at all concerned and indeed possibly passively supporting the application?
In these cases frankly it does not make any sense and I have seen a number of these in many areas, particularly of central London.
Similarly in some local boroughs, there are policy hours and if an application is made by a good operator in excess of those, the licensing officer will object regardless of the merits of the application, meaning at best there will be delay and extra cost of having to go to a hearing and at worst the application will be refused even though there is no individual specific ground of objection or evidence but simply that it is contrary to a policy set many years ago.
I have always found it frustrating that certain noise interference, which is inevitable living in the city; aeroplanes, public transport, trains, bin lorries, people, music from flats, is regarded as simply something to put up with, but when a pub empties its bottles noisily for say twenty seconds that is cause for complaint, which is then investigated.
Below is a list of practical ideas for measures that would help all leisure operators, including pubs.
- There are too many conditions on many licences; breach of a condition if proved is a criminal offence. In some areas this has led to restrictions that are not necessarily related to licensing. I am thinking particularly of waste and deliveries. It is not unusual to have a condition restricting deliveries before say 8am. This is most likely if to affect the small supplier (bread for example) who many in the local borough would wish to support as a local business. It cannot be sensible that if the local supplier is delayed and delivers its bread at 8.15am the manager of the premises could receive a letter threatening prosecution for breach of condition? These conditions are not replicated (unless on planning) for other businesses and so the flower shop next door, which receives for example an inconsiderate delivery at 8.30am, is not at risk of criminal prosecution.
- There should be more weight given to a proven operator. Some policies particularly cumulative impact policies specifically state that the quality of the operator is irrelevant. How can that be the case? The argument is that no matter how good the operator another premises of whatever sort and however well run is bound to add to the cumulative impact. It is rather depressing that even if I prove that I can do a good job it means nothing and it is refreshing to see for example that Brighton’s new licensing policy does take this into account and I believe that other areas should also do the same.
- A number of local councils, particularly in London, like restaurants but do not like bars. Their policies reflect this with a restaurant meaning that anyone drinking alcohol must at some stage be seated and dining is more welcome than bar use where the predominant activity is indeed the consumption of alcohol (although less so these days), seated or standing. This is a blunt tool and not only does not respect the quality of operator (see above), or the fact that a blend is needed for the local economy where all types of business benefit, but that many businesses operate with a mixture. A number of years ago when these policies first came in many restaurants had tables that were booked in advance - but this has changed with even very food led businesses wanting to be able to welcome people to have a drink even though they may not be eating. In some areas this would put them in the bar category even though their sale of drink to customers who are not eating is probably less than 5% and the policy would be against them. This does not seem to make sense.
- More needs to be done in relation to outside areas, particularly on the highway. The legislation is still complex and although the Business and Planning Act has tried to simplify things there are still a number of rules and conditions which make it difficult. One of these is that in these areas customers must be seated. Why? This means if I do not have a tables and chairs licence people can stand and drink on the highway as that is perfectly lawful but if they stand in an area where there are tables and chairs as a result of permission granted by the local authority then the premises is in breach of condition. Similarly use of external areas and highway is being sought more and more by operators seeing it as an opportunity for special occasions, Christmas markets, etc even to put bars there, and that would normally fall foul of street trading legislation which requires a licence but in some areas that would be impossible to obtain.
- Balance – many of these rules and conditions mentioned above are designed to control and pre-empt issues. I would prefer to see operators particularly proven ones as I have mentioned being given an opportunity to operate for example on the highway even with a bar, and there are plenty of powers to remove these as many permissions are renewable. There should be greater emphasis on the operator and enforcement on complaint rather than, imposing restrictions first.
These are my conclusions: the trade in my view and experience does not want later hours. Many pubs do not operate to their hours as it is, particularly in the early part of the week, but would welcome greater flexibility and understanding particularly in relation to things like noise complaints.
I have been involved with a pub recently where a new resident moved into an area near a very popular and successful community pub and started making complaints. Although the council have been reasonable it has been stressful as the starting point is that you are doing something wrong and what you are going to do about it.
The starting point should be a greater balance as these were occasional outdoor events designed to drive revenue and to keep local people happy.
The council are not taking any action but a more balanced approach would be welcome in all of these areas.
- James Anderson is a partner at Poppleston Allen
