|
Clause 17
Applicant for premises licence
Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Field: I did not table an amendment to this clause, but subsection (2) refers to individuals not being able to apply for premises licences unless they are aged 18 or over. Does that apply to current licence regulations? I appreciate that 18 is the age at which alcohol can legally be purchased in this country, but common sense would suggest that having a premises licence would be an added burden. Has any thought been given to raising the age to 21, which must have applied at some point in the past?
Dr. Howells: I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will be interested to know that, after a great deal of pressure from the industry, we only recently reduced the age to 18.
Mr. Field: As I said, although I did not table any amendments to the clause, I wished to gauge why 18 was the designated age. Will many teenagers apply for or receive a premises licence for the sale of alcohol? It sounds as if significant representations have been made by the alcohol and entertainment industry, so perhaps the Minister will enlighten us.
Dr. Howells: I cannot remember whether I am making a speech or the hon. Gentleman is giving way to me.
I am glad the hon. Gentleman has raised—
The Chairman: Order. You are responding, but other hon. Members also want to speak.
Mr. Hoban: May I take the Minister back to subsection (1)? The House of Lords exempted churches, but other church premises such as church halls are not exempted and I cannot see who would be able to apply for a licence for a church hall or other church facilities. Paragraph (a) talks about people who carry on a business, but a caretaker or chairman of the management committee of a church hall would not be carrying on a business. I cannot see where, between
Column Number: 270
paragraphs (a) and (j), somebody who held such a position would fit.
Dr. Howells: I shall try to get a specific list to the hon. Gentleman. This matter has come up in previous debates.
If a church hall, or a similar kind of hall, becomes a venue for the sale of alcohol, there is nothing to prevent someone on the committee becoming the personal licence holder. They would, of course, have to prove that they were capable. In most cases, as I am sure the hon. Gentleman knows, when people at such venues want to sell alcohol they contact a local publican or someone who is already a personal licence holder to subcontract for them. As I understand it, there is nothing to prevent them doing so. Churches are not exempt under the Bill, except where there is entertainment. That is the difference. An applicant could be any person connected with the church hall, so I do not think that there would be a barrier to people doing as I have mentioned. The hon. Gentleman will know that there is no reason why the secretary of the chrysanthemum society, or anyone else involved, may not get an occasional licence to put on a reception or other event.
I cannot remember the exact question asked by the hon. Member for Cities of London and Westminster. [Hon. Members: ''The age limit.''] That is a timely reminder to the Committee that we are dealing not only with pubs but with cinemas. The cinema owners were keen that we should bring down the age to 18, because that would help them in many ways. Many young people are keen to enter that industry, from which they were barred as managers until we changed the age limit.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 17 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 18
Application for premises licence
Mr. Field: I beg to move amendment No. 123, in
The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:
Amendment No. 124, in
clause 19, page 12, line 9, after 'the', insert 'licensing statement or the'.
Amendment No. 125, in
clause 19, page 12, line 10, leave out 'and'.
Amendment No. 126, in
Amendment No. 127, in
clause 19, page 12, line 24, leave out 'and'.
Amendment No. 128, in
clause 19, page 12, line 26, at end insert
Column Number: 271
Amendment No. 192, in
clause 22, page 14, line 8, after 'plays', insert 'or adult entertainments'.
Amendment No. 193, in
clause 22, page 14, line 9, after 'plays', insert 'or adult entertainment'.
Amendment No. 194, in
clause 22, page 14, line 10, after 'plays', insert 'or adult entertainment'.
Amendment No. 129, in
Mr. Field: The clause deals with the application for the premises licence. Under subsection (4) there is an obligation to have an operating schedule, which is
''a document in the prescribed form and includes a statement''
about various matters. Without the amendment, which would add the words
''whether the licensable activities will involve nudity or activities of a sexual nature'',
the applicants would not have to inform local authorities on the operating schedule whether their premises would show nudity or entertainment of a sexual nature, such as lap dancing. Most people consider sex licences as being prevalent—dare I say it—in my constituency in the past, but lap dancing has become a more familiar activity during recent years.
To help the Committee understand the amendments, some explanation of the existing legal framework might be useful. In London at present, a public entertainment licence under the London Government Act 1963 is required for premises to be used for the purposes of either public dancing, or music and public entertainment of a like kind. Entertainment such as striptease or lap dancing can be, and generally is, licensed under that provision.
Equally, it follows that premises that are licensed for the provision of public entertainment may provide entertainment such as lap dancing or striptease unless prevented from doing so by a condition attached to the licence. There are two ways forward. In the city of Westminster the rules of management—the standard conditions attached to all entertainment licences—say that entertainment involving nudity or sexual content may not be provided. Accordingly, premises that wish to provide such entertainment must apply for that standard rule to be waived. The council has a policy about how such applications will be considered and when they will be granted. Of course, like all such policies, it is subject to judicial review.
The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 introduced the licensing of sex establishments, such as sex shops and sex cinemas. In London, the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1986 enabled licensing authorities to decide that as well as sex cinemas and sex shops, sex
Column Number: 272
encounter establishments should be licensed. A sex encounter establishment is a place where performances involving sexual stimulation or nudity, including peep-shows as well as striptease and lap dancing, are given.
The 1986 Act also provided that any premises that already had a public entertainment licence would not require a sex encounter establishment licence in addition. To avoid dual licensing, the public entertainment licensing regime would continue to apply for premises that already had a licence. I shall set out the proposed position under the Bill. The provision of regulated entertainment is a licensable activity, and a dance performance, as well as the playing of recorded music, will fall within the definition of regulated entertainment. In effect, striptease and lap dancing would be licensable activities under the Bill.
By virtue of the amendment made to the 1982 Act by paragraph 84(3) of schedule 6 to this Bill, premises licensed under what will become the Licensing Act 2003—assuming that the Bill is passed this Session—either for the provision of regulated entertainment or for the purposes of late-night refreshment, will not require a licence as a sex encounter establishment. The Bill will avoid the dual licensing issues to which I referred, by ensuring that striptease and lap dancing establishments are licensed under the Bill, not under other legislation.
It is unclear what the Government regard as the licensing authority's responsibility concerning the licensing of striptease clubs and lap dancing establishments. That is the main reason why we want an operating schedule—to highlight and alert the licensing authority. None of the licensing objectives other than that relating to the protection of children relates to such issues. Paragraph 8.49 of the Government's draft guidance states:
''In general, licensing authorities should not use their powers under the 2003 Act to seek to impose conditions which censor the content of any form of regulated entertainment as defined in the Act.''
We must remember that regulated entertainment would include lap dancing clubs and striptease. The draft guidance continues:
''This is not a proper function of licensing law and . . . cannot be properly related to the licensing objectives. The contents of regulated entertainment is a matter which is addressed by existing laws governing indecency and obscenity. Where the concern is about protecting children, their access should be restricted, but no other limitation should normally be imposed.''
I am talking about what the guidance means for the city of Westminster—specifically, but not exclusively, places such as Soho. Lap dancing clubs now appear in many of our big cities, and in many other boroughs besides the city of Westminster. A local authority would no longer be able to limit the numbers of premises providing entertainment of a sexual nature within certain parts of the city by attaching the type of condition that has already been mentioned to a licence. Except for situations involving access for children, it appears that a licensing authority can draw no distinction between premises that provide lap dancing and those that provide live music. For example, there will be no scope to say that a
Column Number: 273
residential area, or a location next to a church or a school, would not be suitable for lap dancing activity.
4.15 pm
Our amendments would address that problem by requiring an applicant to state, when applying, whether his proposed activities would involve nudity or activity of a sexual nature. They would also enable the licensing authority to attach conditions to the licence, if they were required for the promotion of the licensing objectives, whether or not they were consistent with the activities proposed by the applicant. Amendment No. 123 would have the same equally desirable effect in other cases not necessarily involving a sexual element.
We hope that amending schedule 6 will mean that premises providing lap dancing, topless waitressing or other strip shows will be licensed under future legislation specifically relating to entertainment of a sexual nature. I hope that the Minister will give serious consideration to the vacuum in the current arrangements.
|
