PR&SR Bill - Update

Licensing was finally and firmly on the agenda during the 5th day of the Report stage. The clauses debated are dealt with below:

1. Licensing authorities as responsible authorities

It appears Licensing Authorities will be RA's if the Bill is passed in its current format.

2. Reducing the burden: premises licences

"Appropriate" versus "Necessary". The proposed amendment would delete these provisions from the Bill and retain the "necessary" test. It was stated by Baroness Browning that "these decisions will still need to be evidence-based."

Statutory guidance on the new tests will be included albeit at the present time no one was in a position to say that the guidance will be available at this stage of the Bill, but only that it will be made available. It was also confirmed that this will be consulted upon to ensure correct interpretation once the legislation is applied.

3. Early morning alcohol restriction orders

Lord Clement-Jones probed whether there are plans to introduce exemptions from the late night levy and, if so, what those might be. For instance, would there be exemptions for private members' clubs which do not sell to members of the public but are membership-based or would there be exemptions which recognise best practice and social responsibility initiatives such as Best Bar None, business improvement districts, Purple Flag and Pubwatch etc.

Lord De Mauley confirmed that there will be a full public consultation on the secondary legislation on EMROs later this summer. In relation to private clubs it will be considered in the consultation whether to include not-for-profit clubs and sports clubs as a separate class before bringing forward the regulations

4. Power for licensing authorities to set fees

Amendment 305ZB sought to allow LA's to include the costs of social services and trading standards when discharging their functions as responsible authorities under the Act.

The amendment was disagreed, and so will not include these costs.

5. Limits on temporary event notices

The purpose of the proposed amendment was to extend the limits on temporary event notices from 12 to 15 events per annum.

This being on the basis that thousands of clubs throughout the UK including working men's clubs, Conservative, Labour and Liberal clubs, British Legion, miners' and Armed Forces' clubs, play a vitally important part in the lives of their. The proposal to extend that by three occasions a year gives these non-profit-making clubs the opportunity to play a greater part in contributing to fundraising and community events and supporting good causes.

As the Government have announced that they will shortly be carrying out a public consultation, led by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, on the reform of regulated entertainment under the Licensing Act 2003, this amendment was withdrawn.

6. Late night levy requirement

Amendments 305B and 305C were put forward to extend the ability of Licensing Authorities to determine the extent of the geographical spread of the late-night levy area so that it need not apply to the whole local authority area.

A Licensing Authority is currently prohibited from applying the levy as it is currently stated in only parts of its area. Removing that provision and inserting the words of the amendment would have allowed licensing authorities to designate a particular town or city centre within its control as being liable for the late-night levy.

A further Amendment was inserted to probe the Government's reasons for giving discretion to licensing authorities as to whether to grant exemptions or discounts for the late-night levy, but not for the early morning alcohol restriction orders.

Lord De Mauley responded by stating that "we are confident that we have provided tools such as early morning alcohol restriction orders to allow licensing authorities to target specific areas with alcohol problems. Businesses profit from supplying alcohol in a safe, late-night environment, so they should contribute to the very substantial police costs incurred. If we gave a licensing authority the power to target the levy, fewer businesses would contribute."

A consultation is still due to take place on this issue and even more so in the case of the late-night levy than in the case of early morning alcohol restriction orders. It was also added by Lord De Mauley that "we wish to use the levy to promote participation in best practice schemes, and we will explore that further in consultation".

As such neither amendment was made.

7. Application of net amount of levy payments

Amendments not pursued.

8. Permitted exemption and reduction categories

Amendments not pursued.

9. Youth rehabilitation orders: alcohol monitoring requirement

The amendments would allow magistrates an additional sentencing arm, that of an alcohol monitoring requirement, where offenders whose crime had been alcohol-fuelled could be referred to a compulsory alcohol sobriety scheme. Such schemes cannot happen, and therefore cannot be piloted and evaluated effectively, without primary legislation. This new sentencing power would allow courts to require an offender to abstain from alcohol and be regularly tested twice a day to demonstrate compliance as part of any sentence, with provision for how breaches should be dealt with. Alcohol recovery support would also be offered.

Amendment disagreed, and therefore no change to the proposed.

The Third Reading of the Bill will take place on the 19th July.

In summary a few amendments, a few more consultations promised a lot unchanged!

We urge the trade to respond on further consultations to have their voice heard!

We will keep you posted!