Licensing Bill [Lords]

---

[back to previous text]

Mr. Jones: It is statutory.

Mr. Turner: I thank the hon. Gentleman. Therefore there is a precedent for what I am proposing. The situation with applications for the storage of lorries is that the applicant must place the advertisement in a newspaper that circulates within the area.

In one case in my constituency, the advertisement was placed by the applicant in The News (Portsmouth), which circulates on the island, albeit not widely. All planning applications are advertised by the Isle of Wight county council in the pages of the Isle of Wight County Press. That is where people tend to look for such applications. Of course, licensing applications may be advertised in both organs, but certainly in the Isle of Wight County Press.

Jim Knight: I am trying to help move things on. Will the hon. Gentleman explain his amendment in the context of subsection (5)(a), which states:

''in a manner which is prescribed and is likely to bring the application to the attention of the interested parties likely to be affected by it'',

because it would seem possible to prescribe that that should be advertised in the Isle of Wight County Press, not the other newspaper that we talked about.

Mr. Turner: It would indeed, if the Minister could go into such detail, but it would be difficult for him to find a form of words that specifies such matters. Indeed, in the case of the application for the storage of lorries, the courts found that it was hard to find a form of words that would specify which newspaper would be appropriate. Moreover, it seemed to be sensible that the advertisements should be consolidated by the licensing authority, so that it would not only be less expensive in the long run, but make it easier for members of the public to find them, rather than have them separated and spread out in bits and pieces over the public notices pages, which sometimes happens in local newspapers. It is a simple proposal and I hope that the Minister agrees with it.

Dr. Howells: As the hon. Gentleman said, the amendment may have been tabled with the intention of reducing the financial burden on applicants and letting more people know that the application has been made. However, I fear that it would not achieve that. Licensing authorities would need to recover costs incurred through advertising those applications and, given the Government's intention of setting fees at a level that would allow full recovery of costs for licensing authorities, additional burdens on the licensing authority would result in a general increase in the licensing fees, which would end up being shouldered by the consumer, although the initial outlay will be for the industry.

The draft guidance states that a short summary of the application, setting out the location of the premises, the proposed licensable activities, the proposed access for children and the proposed hours of opening should be published in two local newspapers. However—and I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will be pleased with this—the Local Government Association and the Association of London Government have advised us, via the advisory group that has been assisting the

Column Number: 281

Department for Culture, Media and Sport with the Bill, that their surveys show that adverts in local papers are not always an effective way of advertising licensing applications. People often dispose of such papers, especially free ones, having glanced at a few of the articles, rather than reading them thoroughly and taking note of the advertisements and announcements.

The LGA and ALG studies show that the best way to advertise licensing applications and the method most likely to prompt interest and comment is to advertise using signs, prominently displayed immediately outside the premises in question. The Government are happy to accept the advice of the LGA and the ALG and as such, we are content to reflect that in the guidance and are minded to do so in secondary legislation.

Mr. Hoban: I am concerned about signs being placed outside premises affected. That works for planning applications to an extent, but given the impact that a new pub could have on the wider community, simply posting a sign outside the site of the new pub would not be sufficient to bring it to the attention of the wider community. Given that one only has a hearing by the licensing committee if one receives representations from local people objecting to an application, it would seem that the widest circulation possible is more likely to generate a genuine reaction from the community to a licensing application.

Dr. Howells: Absolutely. I am glad that the hon. Gentleman has reminded us of that. There would be no compulsion on applicants only to advertise in that way. They can do it in newspapers and they may be required to do so. The hon. Gentleman is right: in certain circumstances there must be the maximum possible advertising. We think that the provisions should significantly reduce the cost to applicants and ensure that local residents are better informed. With that reassurance, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will withdraw the amendment.

Mr. Turner: I welcome the proposal for notices, which I take from the Minister's words to be additional to the advertisements in local newspapers.

Dr. Howells: Yes.

Mr. Turner: I do not think that he has dealt with whether the advertisements should be consolidated or otherwise, but I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 18 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 19

Determination of application for

premises licence

Mr. Moss: I beg to move amendment No. 188, in

clause 19, page 12, line 6, at end insert—

'( ) Where an application for a premises licence is received by a licensing authority but—

(a) it is not made in accordance with section 18, or

(b) the authority is not satisfied under subsection (1)(b),

Column Number: 282

the authority shall return the application to the applicant indicating its reasons for doing so.'.

Clause 18 deals with what a council must do if an application is made that complies with all the rules and regulations regarding the form of application but does not provide for what actions the council must take when the applicant fails to comply. The amendment would ensure that in such cases the authority returns the application to the applicant with some reasons as to why it has not found favour.

Dr. Howells: I was a little confused. I thought that the hon. Gentleman mentioned clause 18, but we are debating clause 19.

Mr. Moss: Clause 19, I am sorry.

Dr. Howells: Clause 118—

Martin Linton (Battersea): Amendment No. 188.

Dr. Howells: I am getting confused, too. It is getting late in the day, though. Amendment No. 188 is unnecessary. It would insert a requirement in clause 19 that any applications received by the licensing authority that were either not amended in accordance with clause 18 or had not met the requirement under clause 18 to advertise an application and give notice of it to responsible authorities, would be returned by the authority to the applicant, setting out the reasons for the rejection of the application.

The provisions already contained in the Bill achieve that result. Clause 19(1) already has the effect that if an application does not meet the specified requirements, no further elaboration is needed. As a public authority, the licensing authority must advise the applicant that the application is not compliant and identify why it has formed that view. There is no reason to state that on the face of the Bill, and I hope that with that reassurance the hon. Gentleman will not press his amendment to a Division.

Mr. Moss: On the basis of that reassurance, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Turner: I beg to move amendment No. 185, in

clause 19, page 12, line 29, at end insert—

'( ) to state that (in its opinion) any of the activities to which the application refers is not licensable;'.

Again, the amendment is simple and, I hope, self-explanatory. It would give a fifth option to the local authority in how to deal with an application. To avoid falling foul of the law, some applicants may make applications for activities for which it is unnecessary to make an application.

Given the breadth and comprehensiveness of the Bill, it is hard to think of examples of such activities. However, I am sure that sooner or later, someone will come up with one. It may be a question of whether a church is a church or a church hall, for example, because some churches are used as church halls as well as churches. That may be something that an applicant, being an honest sort of chap, would want to draw to the attention of the licensing authority. The authority would be prepared to say that in this case it recognised that the space that was being used was the church part

Column Number: 283

of the space, rather than the church hall part, so it was unnecessary to make such an application.

The local authority should have the option to state that any of the activities to which the application refers is not licensable. I put that option in where one might otherwise think that it exists because subsection (3) states that the authority ''must'' take one of the steps mentioned in subsection (4). In other words, it cannot say that the activity is not licensable when it has received an application, unless we give it the power so to do.

Dr. Howells: Whether an activity is licensable or not is a matter not of opinion but of fact. If an application were made for a premises licence to cover an activity not set out in clause 1, it would be null and void. The licensing authority has no power in law to license an activity that is not licensable. Making a statement about those activities cannot alter that fact in any way whatsoever.

It follows that the amendment serves no purpose other than to create confusion, which we can do without at this time of day. It will be important that operating schedules include general information about activities that are not licensable because it will inform decisions about the steps that need to be taken on those premises to promote a licensing objective. For example, general information about the service of table meals, which is not licensable, or the fact that gambling takes place, which is licensable under relevant legislation, will be important to decisions taken about the protection of children from harm. However, the provision of that information would not make those activities licensable in the Bill.

In light of those comments, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not press the amendment to a Division.

 

---

Prepared 10 April 2003