The
Licensing Act 2003 came into force in November 2005.
I have attended more than 100 hearings up and down the country. Hearings
only become necessary when an application is objected to and in most
cases concerns are raised by local residents.
It is not uncommon for individuals to attend hearings intent on
discussing matters that have absolutely nothing to do with the
particular premises. Unfortunately, the licence trade is often blamed
for issues that has nothing to do with it and it obviously doesn’t help
that the media seem intent on unfairly portraying the trade and
exaggerating the impact that the sale of alcohol has.
The Act is clear on what is and isn’t relevant and residents often have
to be reminded that, no matter how passionately they believe in what is
troubling them, only law and order and safety and nuisance issues which
are directly influenced by the premises are relevant and should form
part of the discussion in the licensing hearing. In addition, licensing
committees can rightly take into account the need to protect children
from harm but this is very rarely raised.
Licensed premises should only be taken to task for things that they can
reasonably be expected to have control over. How people behave beyond
the vicinity of the premises are matters of personal responsibility of
individuals under the law.
The above was highlighted recently in an application for variation of a
premises licence in the city centre which would allow part of an
existing premises to trade as a lap-dancing venue. This form of
entertainment has gradually become part of the nation’s zeitgeist and
many people wouldn’t give it a second thought. However, there are others
who find it immoral and unacceptable. In licensing terms the reality,
coincidentally proven by evidence, is that premises of this sort cause
less trouble than, for example, nightclubs. This is confirmed by police
forces throughout the country. We now have around 150 lap- dancing
venues nationally and there is no evidence that their presence makes
women any more vulnerable. If this were the case, we would expect
incontrovertible evidence.
We have had lap-dancing venues for more than 10 years. Children, who are
of course excluded, aren’t exposed to any moral dangers. This is the
only context in which morality in licensing is relevant. The Licensing
Act 2003 has its faults but it has managed to define what licensed
premises can and can’t be rightly blamed for. It is also not to be
viewed as a method of imposing censorship.
In one particular application we received more than 1,000 objections,
many prompted by a campaign instigated by the Church. Understandably
they have a moral agenda but, as we discussed at length in the hearing,
this can’t be imposed upon others. Adult entertainment is perfectly
legal and a well- run premises has as much right to be allowed to
operate as a pub or a restaurant. Indeed, evidence suggests that it
would, in terms of impact, be preferable if more existing venues
converted to this type of use.
|