Issue - meetings
Licensing Policy Review
Meeting: 10/09/2013 - Overview & Scrutiny Committee (Item 8)
8 Licensing Policy Review PDF 116 KB
To consider and comment on the proposed Statement of Licensing Policy in accordance with the Budget and Policy Framework Procedure Rules contained in the Authority’s Constitution. Also to consider and comment on the proposed ‘No Casino’ resolution.
Additional documents:
- 8.2b Appx 1_List of groups_contact details_Licensing Policy review 2013.do..., item 8
PDF 57 KB
- 8.2c Appx 2_Summary of written responses.doc.doc, item 8
PDF 26 KB
- 8.2d Appx 3_On line Responses to the Statement of Licensing Policy Review., item 8
PDF 44 KB
- 8.2e Appx 4_Propsed Changes to the Stmt of Licesing Policy.docx, item 8
PDF 112 KB
- 8.2f Appx 5_Draft Licensing Policyv5.docx, item 8
PDF 424 KB
- 8.2g Appx 6_ No Casino.doc, item 8
PDF 34 KB
- 8.2h Appx 7_EQIA Checklist Licensing Policy v4.docx, item 8
PDF 388 KB
Minutes:
David Tolley, Head of Consumer and Business Regulations, introduced, and highlighted key points, in the report which set out:-
· The statutory requirement for the Council to review and adopt its Statement of Licensing Policy’ at this point, and the purpose of the Statement.
· Stakeholder consultation undertaken to date and inclusion of potential revisions reflecting this. Consultation with OSC under the Budget and Policy Framework contained in the Council’s Constitution, was an element of this.
· The background and outcome of consultation on the proposed ‘No Casino’ resolution, which would amend the Council’s Gambling Policy, a Budget and Policy Framework matter requiring consultation with OSC.
Andy Bamber, Service Head Safer Communities, was also in attendance for this item.
The following points were highlighted by David Tolley:
· Statutory changes to the Licensing Policy summarized at Appendix 4.
· Other key proposals for consultation:-
o Late night levy and the associated allocation of income generated between the Metropolitan Police and the Council (ratio of 70% to 30%)
o Early morning restriction orders which would enable the Council to limit the sale of alcohol from midnight in some areas.
A discussion followed which focused on clarification being sought and given on the following points:-
· Proposals welcomed by Councillor Snowdon, a member of the Licensing Committee, including use of Ultra Violet pens to check duty paid stamps.
· Acknowledging the difficulty of imposing conditions on establishments selling single items of alcohol under the provisions of the Licensing Act 2003, clarification/ assurance sought and given on proposals / plans to impose conditions under Public Health (PH) provisions, now the Council was a PH authority. Officers had examined this, and although the Council could make comments in its PH role such circumstances were not covered by the 4 Objectives of the Licensing Act 2003. The Council would endeavour to address the issue through pricing via a voluntary Community Alcohol Partnership Scheme and try to roll this out in key areas eg vicinity of hostels. The Licensing Committee could also address by adding conditions when granting applications for a license to sell alcohol.
· Clarification/ assurance sought and given that the proposed Licensing Policy had not been skewed by the resident led organisations consulted, as listed at Appendix1 (32 being boroughwide, 15 being from Brick Lane, with only 5 from other areas). Comment that concern had been expressed previously over Metropolitan Police weighting of resources to the Brick Lane area, with residents elsewhere not receiving the attention they were due. Wide consultation had been undertaken including all license holders, publicity in East End Life and responses facilitated through online submission.
· Given the level of campaigning/ lobbying by the local community for a policy on sex entertainment venues (SEVs) little appeared to have been done to address this. There appeared to be a holding policy where restrictions were imposed on such venues but this implied a right for them to exist/ conduct business. Why had the Council not progressed a SEV Policy and why had it not invoked the additional ... view the full minutes text for item 8