|
Dr. Howells: I am glad that the hon. Member for Fareham has given me an opportunity to explain the clause at greater length, because it is important to define the key differences—he alluded to some of them—between a licensed premises and a club. Clubs are important parts of our society. The club secretary will discharge the administrative duties. The Committee has discussed the importance of the police, the licensing body or the responsible body being able to ask someone, ''Who is in charge here? Where are the rules?'' We also discussed the role and status of the secretary.
The certificate must be granted only subject to such conditions as are consistent with the club operating schedule, unless relevant representations are made in respect of the application for that certificate. Where relevant representations are received, the licensing authority must hold a hearing. People have to be able to represent the club; it has to be clear that it has responsible authorities. However, that case is different from that of the designated premises supervisor; the hon. Gentleman is right to highlight that.
The test for what amounts to relevant representations is set out in the clause—that is why it is important. It requires that representations should be made in time by an interested party or a responsible authority, which is defined in clause 69, and that they should relate to the likely effect of the granting of the certificate on the promotion of the licensing objectives. Just as in the case of licensed premises, where representations are made by interested parties, if the licensing authority determines that they are vexatious or frivolous or a repeat of something heard earlier, it can refuse to take them seriously and to hold a hearing. It has to explain to those who have sent in the representations or concerns why it has done so, and it has to be able to explain the reasons for its decisions to the interested parties.
If relevant representations are made when the hearing is held, or where it has been dispensed with by agreement, the licensing authority must grant the certificate, if it considers it necessary for the promotion of the licensing objectives. The hon. Gentleman reminded us that the same thing would apply to a licensed premises. It must grant that certificate subject to the conditions that are consistent with a club operating schedule modified as the authority considers
Column Number: 374
necessary for the promotion of the licensing objectives. It must exclude any of the club activities applied for, or reject the application.
Different conditions may be imposed in relation to different parts of the premises or in respect of different qualifying club activities. By setting out clearly the way in which an application for a club premises certificate must be treated, both when relevant representations have been made about it or when they have not, the clause reflects the aim throughout the Bill of striking a fair balance between the industry and those affected by it. It provides a simple administrative procedure for applications where appropriate, and greater scrutiny when needed.
I turn to the point that the hon. Gentleman made at the end about the question of who becomes responsible. He is right to talk about the special place of the steward, who could be an employee and a member of the club. If he or she is a member, that imposes special conditions on the role that he or she may play in selling alcohol to club members in relation to the generation of private profit. The club secretary is key to the matter. The responsibilities and role of the club secretary are important in reflecting the decisions taken by the club committee.
Clubs are different from licensed premises. The two institutions are very different and I am not sure whether I have made that clear to the hon. Gentleman. The premises supervisor may be an employee of a big pub chain. He may be an owner-occupier, or a tenant of a licensed premises, but he is different from the secretary of a club who, after all, is acting on the decisions taken by the club committee. That is why clubs are different from licensed premises and why the licensed premises supervisor is a different creature from the secretary or the steward.
Mr. Hoban: I am grateful to the Minister for that explanation. I can see what he is driving at and why there is no requirement on the part of the steward or club secretary to have a personal licence. My understanding of his argument is that the secretary and the club committee are expected to be so intimately bound up with the running of the premises that the nature of the relationship is very different to that of a big pub company or an individual licensed premises. That explanation is entirely satisfactory.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 72, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 73
Prohibited conditions: associate members
and their guests
Mr. Turner: I beg to move amendment No. 359, in
The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:
Amendment No. 360, in
clause 73, page 43, line 17, at beginning insert
Column Number: 375
Amendment No. 361, in
Mr. Turner: My hon. Friend the Member for North-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Moss) referred in an earlier sitting to an absence of a definition in the Bill of the word ''guest''. I thought about that when I considered the clause. I shall refer later to clause 191, which contains a large number of references to definitions, but the clause is not terribly helpful in this case. In the left hand column, headed ''Expression'', it refers to ''guest'', and in the right hand column, headed ''Interpretation provision'', it states ''section 67''.
5.15 pm
If I introduced someone, as my guest, into a club of which I was a member, I would not expect them to pay me for the privilege, nor would I expect them to pay me or to pay across the bar for any of the drinks, other refreshments or entertainments that they enjoyed while they were my guest in that club. On the other hand, the expression ''guest'' can be used by an hotelier to describe someone who would indeed pay for the entertainment, food and drink that he enjoyed while on the hotel premises. What is the definition of guest? Clause 67 is even less helpful than clause 191. The definition in clause 67 forms a perfect circle, saying:
''Any reference . . . to a guest . . . includes a reference to . . . a guest of an associate member of the club.''
That is not what I would call a definition. What is a guest? Is it someone introduced on payment of a fee to the member providing the introduction?
Dr. Howells indicated dissent.
Mr. Turner: The Minister shakes his head. Is it possible, for example, for a club to ask a guest to pay an introduction fee to the club rather than to an individual member?
Dr. Howells indicated dissent.
Mr. Turner: The Minister shakes his head again. I am interested in that, because many Conservative clubs do in fact require a guest to pay an introduction fee not to the member introducing them but to the club to which they are introduced.
Dr. Howells: I am fascinated to hear that there are Conservative clubs that impose a charge on guests. Presumably, those are guests of members of the Conservative club or of a club affiliated to it, or of a club to which the Conservative club concerned is affiliated. I do not know if we are talking about Freshwater again, but there is nothing to prevent that club, in its standing orders or rules, from charging anyone coming in under such circumstances if they see fit. However, we would not prescribe that and I am sure that it is not prescribed in any national legislation. We are certainly not doing so in the Bill.
Mr. Turner: I welcome the fact that the Minister—I think that I understood him correctly—is not prescribing that a guest should pay a fee. However, I think that he is also not prescribing that a guest should
Column Number: 376
not pay a fee, either for the card that entitles them to the introduction, which we call an inter-affiliation card, or for an introduction to a particular club. I question whether someone can properly be described as a guest who has paid a fee to the member undertaking the introduction. I tabled the amendment to divine that. I do not have a particularly strong view one way or the other, but I am aware that the Bill is a little vague in its definition.
Dr. Howells: The term ''guest'' has never required definition under licensing law and that has never given rise, so far as any of us understand, to any particular difficulties. It is left to the rules of the club. If a scam is operating in some clubs that he knows of, whereby members actually charge a guest a fee, which they then harvest and take away, that is a nice little earner but it is certainly not the intention of the Bill.
Mr. Turner: I know of no such club in my constituency, although what happens on this island may be entirely different from what happens there.
Mr. Moss: My hon. Friend raises an interesting spectre when he talks about payment. He has mentioned payment to the introducing member or to the club. If the emphasis of the legislation as it pertains to clubs is that alcohol is supplied, not sold to club members—in other words, the club members own the liquor store—how can a guest go in and pay, perhaps over the bar, for liquor that should be supplied to members only?
Mr. Turner: I might need notice of that question if I am to get my head round it. On the face of it, it would seem unusual to expect a guest to pay for any drinks, refreshments or entertainment in a club. The Minister is describing neither a narrow course nor a winding course. On the issue in question, he is like someone who walks across open moorland without worrying too much about where the footpath is. Since he came to my constituency to launch the ''Walk the Wight'' walking festival about 12 months ago, he is welcome to describe such a broad course without regard to any particular boundaries because, like the law in the present case, a footpath can be immensely broad and have no discernible boundaries. I am sure that he will correct me if I am wrong, but it appears from what he said that guest has no known definition as far as such a person's eligibility to pay for refreshment is concerned.
|
