Moved by Lord Sharpe of Epsom That the Grand Committee do consider
the Alcohol Licensing (Coronavirus) (Regulatory Easements)
(Amendment) Regulations 2023. Relevant document: 53rd Report from
the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee (special attention
drawn to the instrument). The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of
State, Home Office (Lord Sharpe of Epsom) (Con) My Lords, these
regulations, which were laid before the House on 11 September,
contain measures...Request free trial
Moved by
That the Grand Committee do consider the Alcohol Licensing
(Coronavirus) (Regulatory Easements) (Amendment) Regulations
2023.
Relevant document: 53rd Report from the Secondary Legislation
Scrutiny Committee (special attention drawn to the
instrument).
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office () (Con)
My Lords, these regulations, which were laid before the House on
11 September, contain measures that are intended to continue to
cut unnecessary red tape in order to support the hospitality
sector in light of the ongoing residual effects of the Covid-19
pandemic.
As your Lordships may be aware, the Licensing Act 2003 enables
licences to be granted to sell alcohol for consumption on site,
for consumption off site, or for both. In the event that a
business obtains an on-sales only licence and subsequently wishes
also to do off-sales, it can apply to its licensing authority for
a variation that would add off-sales to its licence.
The Business and Planning Act 2020 included a temporary provision
that meant holders of licences that covered only on-sales would
automatically be entitled to make off-sales, removing the need
for businesses to apply for a variation, thus saving them time
and money. In practice, this has enabled pubs and restaurants
that have only an on-sales licence to sell alcohol for takeaway,
to operate alcohol delivery services and to extend their service
outdoors. Specifically, the measures have enabled businesses to
serve alcohol in the area covered by any pavement licence they
had, facilitated by a parallel but independent easement to
pavement licensing. This parallel easement created a temporary
streamlined process to apply for and have granted a pavement
licence. The Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill, currently
completing its passage through Parliament, will make the changes
to pavement licensing permanent.
The off-sales provision has benefited at least 38,000 licensed
premises in England and Wales that previously did not have an
off-sales licence, and, having previously been extended twice, it
was due to expire on 30 September 2023. These new regulations
extend this measure until 31 March 2025 to ensure that businesses
will continue to benefit from these provisions for a further 18
months. During this time, the Government will explore the
creation of a unified pavement licence that includes the
consumption and sale of alcohol in the outside pavement area.
Work is already under way to establish how this will work in
practice. We intend to have permanent arrangements in place that
can take effect when the extension expires.
I am confident that extending the off-sales provision is the
right course of action in order to provide vital ongoing support
to the hospitality sector. Although the immediate Covid-19 crisis
has passed, the residual effects continue to have an immense
impact, especially for businesses in the hospitality sector. Many
continue to face high levels of Covid-related debt, with some
reporting in July that their debt repayments exceeded 100% of
their turnover.
For the purposes of clarity, I note that another regulatory
easement set out in the BPA relating to temporary event
notices—TENs—will not be extended. The provision temporarily
increased the annual number of TENs that a licensed premises user
can have in respect of a premises from 15 to 20 per year and
increased the maximum number of days on which temporary events
may be held at such premises from 21 to 26 per year. We have
decided not to extend this easement for the simple reason that
the additional TENs provided for in the BPA have been
underutilised and are no longer deemed necessary. As such, on 31
December 2023 that easement will lapse.
These measures will continue to benefit a wide range of
businesses, including pubs, restaurants, wedding venues and small
festivals. The hospitality industry needs our support, so I
commend these regulations to the Committee and beg to move.
(Con)
My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for introducing these
regulations and I declare my interests as set out in the
register. I rise briefly to add my support to my noble friend and
this measure, and to thank the Government for the support given
to the hospitality industry over the last few difficult
years.
Personally, I am a supporter of these provisions becoming
permanent, and I hope that will come, but in the meantime, I am
happy that these regulations will bring 18 additional months of
advantage to hard-working, tax-revenue-paying businesses. This
extension enables businesses to continue to serve alcohol in the
area covered by a pavement licence, for takeaway and for
delivery, as my noble friend said, all without the need to apply
for a variation to their licence. I am confident that this will
continue to benefit thousands of licensed premises across England
and Wales. I also applaud the Government’s commitment to explore
the creation of a unified pavement licence that includes the
consumption and sale of alcohol in the outside pavement area.
In the middle of one of the most joyless events known to
mankind—“Sober October”—it is heartening to see some positive
news for the hospitality industry. Clearly, the UK’s unelected
temperance movement has decided that “Dry January” is no longer
enough and wishes to spread even more misery. As far as I am
aware, the National Police Chiefs’ Council said that, when the
regulations were first introduced and then extended, no increase
in crime and disorder resulted. That shows that most people—the
vast majority—can enjoy a modest drink without incident.
We know the hospitality sector has taken a huge hit in recent
times; although recovering, there is still a way to go for the
industry to get back on its pre-pandemic feet. The instrument, as
extended today, has helped and will continue to help businesses
diversify. Figures reveal that 383 pubs closed in the initial
half of this year, to be demolished or converted, the equivalent
of two every day. In the whole of 2022, 386 such venues ceased to
exist. The overall number of pubs in England and Wales, including
vacant ones, now stands at 39,404. The total number of closed
clubs is currently not known but the social club sector has seen
a number of closures, although not on the same scale.
The reasoning is clear. Let us continue to make things easier and
give opportunities to businesses to survive and thrive—positives
which we know trickle down to employed staff and to customers who
still enjoy socialising. Let us also remind ourselves that, when
the Licensing Act was passed in 2003 and introduced in 2005, it
was hailed as a means to help create a café society, something
which is more easily achieved with the ability to drink al
fresco.
(CB)
My Lords, I declare an interest as chair of the Commission on
Alcohol Harm. I am grateful to the Minister for the way in which
he has introduced these regulations and welcome that temporary
event notices will not be continued.
I will focus on the impact of easement, because different health
and crime risks are associated with on-sales and off-sales. There
is evidence from the Institute of Alcohol Studies that, while
on-sales were not happening because of Covid, sadly, the
incidence of alcohol-related violence did not drop. There is a
link with off-sales. In licence hearings, responsible authorities
and interested parties often present evidence of off-sales being
a contributory factor in crime and anti-social behaviour.
There are four licensing objectives, which we need to remember:
the prevention of crime and disorder; the protection of public
safety; the prevention of public nuisance; and the protection of
children from harm. There is a concern that making the regulatory
easements permanent could undermine local statements of licensing
policy. How will responsible authorities and other parties be
able to make representations regarding the suitability of the
extension and how will any data be collected?
One of the problems with alcohol availability is that it plays a
key role in being the biggest risk factor for death, ill health
and disability among 15 to 49 year-olds—young people with their
lives ahead of them. The density of licensed premises is
correlated with alcohol-related deaths, hospital admissions and
neighbourhood deprivation. In Scotland, research found that
neighbourhoods with the most alcohol outlets had crime rates over
four times higher than those with the least. Public health and
licensing have to be linked, and there is overwhelming support
from directors of public health for them to be included in
discussions of licensing. How will they be included, to allow
local authorities to make decisions in the overall interest of
their community, not only of the landlord of the pub?
How will all this be monitored before the next deadline date? The
balance of sales of food and drink in pubs and other places of
hospitality and the social interaction that is important for a
community to have somewhere to go, meet and interact does not
happen with off-sales to anything like the same extent. A lot of
lone drinking, which is really harmful in society, is linked to
off-sales.
I hope the Government will follow the advice that came from the
Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee:
“The Government intend to use this 18-month extension to
formulate and bring forward a long-term policy in the area. When
doing so, we”—
that is, the committee—
“expect the Government to provide Parliament with a more robust
evidence base, including addressing concerns put forward in the
consultation”.
(Con)
My Lords, I congratulate my noble friend the Minister and support
him in bringing forward these regulations. I share my noble
friend Lord Smith’s ambition that we might eventually have a
permanent pavement licence. I declare my interest at the outset
as chairman of the original committee on the review of the
Licensing Act 2003, of which my noble friends Lord Smith and
were leading lights. I also
had the privilege to chair the follow-up inquiry, which was
instigated by the Deputy Speaker and the Liaison Committee. I
also have the privilege of chairing PASS, the national proof of
age standard scheme.
I have a couple of questions for my noble friend the Minister. In
its helpful briefing, the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny
Committee indicates at paragraph 13 that the Government are
probably underestimating the benefits to the economy, the
hospitality sector and employment of the extension of pavement
licensing, which promotes the possibility for businesses to know
with certainty that they will be able to have that licence until
the end of March 2025, as my noble friend said. Does he accept
that the lack of reliable data points to the Government being
very conservative and underestimating the potential for higher
employment and increased outside socialising?
I hope the regulations will lead to the café culture that lay
behind the original philosophy of the 2003 Act. However,
conflicts could arise where residential developments are built
adjacent to existing premises that have a well-developed business
model with outside pavement licensing. Equally, there could be an
application for a new business adjacent to a residential
area.
In earlier proceedings on the levelling-up Bill, a number of us
who served on the licensing review committee brought forward an
amendment to introduce the agent of change principle. Might my
noble friend open the door to considering developing that
principle in his discussions in the department? It would go a
long way to resolving some of these difficulties at the earliest
possible stage.
With those few remarks, I wish my noble friend every success with
these regulations.
(Con)
My Lords, I too support the regulations. Indeed, I hope they are
put on a permanent basis, as my noble friend the Minister
suggested. I agree with the suggestion that the review should
take due account of the effect on people in the vicinity, and
with the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, on the public health issues
she outlined.
I have given notice to the Minister of the point I am going to
raise, because it is on the broader canvas of the effect of Covid
and regulations post-pandemic, as we now see off the dreadful
pandemic period. Many of us will recall that during the pandemic
itself, we were able to deal with certain things in a very
effective way, which gave rise to a warm glow of satisfaction. I
am thinking particularly of rough sleeping, which disappeared in
a way that many of us found both stunning and encouraging. Sadly,
it is now of course creeping back. Have the Government given any
thought as to how this can be reversed?
4.45pm
Another feature of the pandemic that we all recall was that, all
of a sudden, there was a host of very willing, not to say
enthusiastic, volunteers who came forward to help with the
vaccination programme. What happened to these people? We do not
want to lose that well of good will post-pandemic, and we are in
danger of doing so if we do not think of ways to use that very
beneficial aspect of the pandemic to good effect.
I will briefly mention one area which I think the Government are
neutral on, although at times they seem to be somewhat against
it: the change in working patterns. Many people, understandably,
are now working more from home. Ministers have sometimes
indicated that that is not a good thing. Regardless of whether it
is good or bad, the data suggests it is happening, and that will
have an effect on communities and their retail aspect, which is
another element. In short, I am looking for some reassurance that
the Government are considering these issues and that they will
consider having a debate, so we can all participate in a
discussion of them. I leave to one side the health issues, which
I know are being looked at in the Covid-19 inquiry. But there are
many other issues as well, which I hope can be addressed.
With that, I am certainly in favour of these regulations, which
strike me as very sensible.
(Con)
My Lords, I express similar support for the regulations and hope
that when the final review is completed in March 2025, we move to
a more permanent system of operation. I particularly welcome the
support the Prime Minister gave to the extension while these
issues were being considered.
I begin by pointing out that I was previously Chief Executive of
the British Beer and Pub Association and sat on the other side of
negotiations with the Government about the changes of the
Licensing Act. I had many a discussion with the noble Lord,
, about not only licensing
matters but security matters, which is relevant to the previous
debate. I remember sitting discussing such matters with him when
the bombing of late-night establishments was attempted.
I want to raise an issue that relates to temporary event notices,
and which is not specifically covered by this legislation but
arose earlier this summer in the context of the Lionesses’
success in the football World Cup. We should have considered this
issue during consideration of the 2003 legislation. I, with
others, led the application before the noble and learned Lord,
, to change the interpretation of
the law in 2002, when the men’s football World Cup was played in
Japan and South Korea. He very sensibly said: “My original
judgment was X. I now see that the circumstances have changed”,
and the nation was allowed extended drinking hours for the period
of the 2002 World Cup. Unfortunately, due to an oversight, the
only way that temporary event notices can be extended is with the
approval of Parliament. Of course, while the Lionesses were
playing Parliament was not sitting, so there was no way that any
temporary provision could officially be made. Fortunately, I
think in most circumstances the police authorities and local
councils were sensible in their application of the intended
law.
Although it is outwith the purview of these regulations, when the
Minister and his officials review the legislation in question,
will they give consideration to circumstances which may arise
when Parliament is not sitting, so that temporary event notices
can easily be granted in some form or another, without the
problems that arose this summer? Otherwise, I wholeheartedly
support the regulations as they stand.
(LD)
My Lords, I also declare an interest—this seems to be the “old
hands” thing—having been on the Front-Bench team which debated
the original Bill in 2003. Since coming back to this issue, the
concerns on both sides have not changed: alcohol, when misused,
damages public health and leads to disorder and other things. But
traditionally, it is our drug of choice—if you like to put it
like that—and the one we use to relax in our society; it is the
accepted norm. What is the best way of regulating it and making
sure that it is used correctly? We also have a hospitability
sector linked to it.
When I read the draft regulations, I was surprised to discover
that we still have a coronavirus extension for the hospitability
sector, although that makes sense when you run through what has
gone on. The overall review of how this will be handled and
organised in the future is the important thing—it is the elephant
in the room, which is at least opaque at this point time; it is
not exactly invisible. When I worked on the original legislation,
I discovered that sports clubs did not have the same sort of
licensing structure as pubs; they had to be dealt with separately
and had been overlooked initially. I suppose that I should
declare an incredibly minor interest as a non-playing member of
my old rugby club.
If we are going to make this process more coherent, these
regulations make some sense. But the points about off-sales and
private drinking often leading to domestic violence and more
health damage are also important. How will that balance be
achieved in the review? That is very important. It is better to
have outside control, such as when a barman or manager can
literally say to somebody, “You have had too much to drink”.
Surely it is preferable to have outside control and influence on
somebody, rather than their sitting at home and quietly drinking
themselves into oblivion and then occasionally interacting with
anybody who tries to interfere with that. What is the
Government’s thinking on that? Can they say a few words about
that process, what is going on and their input into it? Every
time we have discussed alcohol sales, those are the two things we
have been trying to balance. I hope the Minister will be able to
give us some idea.
To be honest, the outcome on this has a degree of cross-party
support; it is not the most political of issues, but people will
make ridiculous speeches, usually ranting about a problem after
it has been dealt with. There is a constant balancing act. It
would be helpful to the House as a whole if we could get some
guidance on the Government’s thinking—and indeed that of the
Labour Benches, because, let us face it, the reality means that
this may well be their problem in about a year’s time.
(Lab)
My Lords, I say at the outset that we are not opposed to the SI,
but I have a few comments to make.
We cannot gloss over the fact—I will come back to why—that,
according to paragraph 10.2 of the Explanatory Memorandum, the
majority of people who responded to the public consultation
opposed what the Government are seeking to do and said that we
should return to the pre-Covid situation. I started by saying
that we are not opposed to the Government’s proposals, but we
have to address the fact that, while many of us have said that we
support the extension of temporary licensing—although this is the
third extension—65% of those who responded to the public
consultation opposed it. The Government will probably say, as is
usually said, that it was a very small sample and not properly
reflective of public opinion; none the less, it is important for
the Minister to address that.
The reason is that, frankly, the Government’s presentation of
this was not as good as it might have been. Since we are in a
conciliatory mood, let us say that it could have been better. The
Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee report is a shocking
indictment of the way the Government introduced what is, by and
large, an uncontroversial measure. Looking at the public
consultation, the Government did not lay out in great detail the
problems that were affecting the hospitality industry and why it
was therefore necessary for them to continue with the temporary
licensing.
I was astonished; I did not realise until I read it, but this was
published only as a result of the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny
Committee saying to the Government, “You haven’t said why you’re
going to do this”, and the Government then sending it a letter
saying, “By the way, industry survey data shows that the
hospitality sector emerged from the pandemic with £10 billion of
Covid-related debt”—as the noble Lord, Lord Smith, reminded us.
You cannot just ignore that. It goes on to talk about the
percentage of people affected, that one in seven hospitality
businesses is still operating at a loss, and so on. Why was that
not included in the original justification for the
instrument?
As the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh, and the noble Lord, , said, the impact assessment
did not mention the benefits—of employment, social interaction
and so on. If you are trying to justify a piece of secondary
legislation, why would you not talk about the reasons you are
doing it—the adverse impact there would be if you did not do it
and its benefits—when all this information is available in the
Home Office? Clearly, the Government have to do something about
this; it is just not good enough. Their legislation will be
impacted, not because it is philosophically wrong but because
they cannot get their act together to put out the decent facts to
support their case, even though they exist.
I say gently to the Minister that perhaps this needs to be looked
at. I say to the noble Lord, , that, if we are in
government in a year’s time and I have any responsibility, in
putting forward a piece of legislation I will do the novel thing
of saying why it is a good idea and giving the facts to support
that, including the benefits to the community from doing so.
(LD)
I look forward to reading it.
(Lab)
As I joke sometimes with other noble Lords, I am sure that if I
do not do it, my comments will be read back to me.
This is important to numerous people’s livelihoods. I will spend
a minute or two on that, because it is a serious matter. As the
noble Lord, Lord Smith, reminded us, this is about significant
numbers of businesses generating significant amounts of money on
which significant employment depends. The noble Lord, , reminded me of the work we
did together. It is a really important industry, not to mention
the social benefits that it brings.
The noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, was quite right to highlight the
concerns. That is why, by March 2025, there needs to be a proper
unified licensing regime that identifies and deals with all this
and looks at the problems that she mentioned. To start the
debate, I do not think the problem is with off-sales from pubs
and restaurants. Anti-social behaviour and the problem drinking
associated with it usually come from off-sales from small corner
shops and so on. In my experience, anti-social behaviour from
young people comes from corner-shop sales. That is a sweeping
generalisation—the vast majority of corner shops are well run—but
the pricing and so on are issues. That is really important.
5.00pm
Another thing that needs tackling—I wonder whether the Minister
can say a little more about it—has been highlighted by members of
the committee. The noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh, said that there
is no information about what the responses to the consultation
said or who was in support. So 65% were opposed and 35% were in
favour—who were they? If the Local Government Association and the
National Police Chiefs’ Council were part of that 35%, that is a
pretty significant thing to highlight in the report. Can the
Minister say a little about who responded and what the views of
the police, local authorities and other significant bodies were
with respect to this?
I have one other point. These regulations relate to England and
Wales. In the various extensions that have happened, have any
problems occurred on the England/Scotland border? For those who
follow these matters, that is not an insignificant question where
licensing laws differ within a small geographical space, as we
probably all know. Did any consultation take into account the
Scottish local authorities along the England/Scotland border?
We do not oppose these regulations on the extension, but they
raise a number of questions about how the Government introduce
legislation. The shoddy way this was done undermines their case
in doing something that, as the Minister can see from the
Committee, has cross-party support. The country deserves better
and to understand why things are being done. I hope that, in the
run-up to deciding whether this third temporary extension until
March 2025 becomes permanent, there will be widespread public
consultation which takes into account the various views there
will be. Some clarification around things such as pavement
licences—what area they refer to and so on—would be welcomed by
all those who work in the industry and others. With that, we will
not oppose the regulations.
(Con)
I thank all noble Lords who have contributed to this debate. I am
pleased that this measure, which ensures continued support for
the hospitality sector, has been generally recognised as a
positive move. I reassure my noble friend Lord Smith that I have
no intention of embracing sober October, and I will happily join
him in that.
As I have already indicated, the long-term goal is to create a
unified pavement licence that includes licensing consent for the
consumption and sale of alcohol in an outside pavement area. This
18-month extension will provide the time necessary to establish
how this will work in practice to bring about the necessary
legislative changes.
I will try to respond to the specific questions, starting with
the points raised by the noble Lord, , about the consultation.
Earlier this year, the Government consulted on whether to make
permanent the alcohol licensing regulatory easements that were
set out in the BPA 2020. A majority of respondents indicated that
they did not wish the off-sales easement to continue and the
Government initially decided not to continue with it. Of those
who responded, broadly speaking, industry was in favour and local
residents and licensing were not. However, I do not have the
precise proportions. The Government later reviewed this decision
and decided to provide additional support to the hospitality
sector by extending this off-sale provision for a further 18
months. I recognise that this has caused confusion for
stakeholders, but it will ensure that the hospitality sector can
maximise every opportunity to recover fully from the ongoing
residual effects of the pandemic on an industry that, as has been
broadly noted, is vital to our economy and culture. I will come
back to the evidence of the economic impact shortly.
The noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, talked about the broader health
evidence that we need to seek. She made some very interesting and
sound points about health, but we believe that the existing
provisions to consider health matters in relation to licensing
applications are sufficient at present. Difficulties remain in
establishing direct links, as the noble Lord, , alluded, between
alcohol-related harms and specific premises. Evidence from
Scotland so far is not particularly compelling, but we will
consider any new evidence. As a general rule, directors of public
health are responsible authorities under the Licensing Act.
I go back to the confusion that may have been caused between the
publication of the consultation results and the decision to
extend the provisions. We apologise for that confusion—I
completely accept that it was not ideal. However, it is right
that we considered all the relevant factors in detail, and we are
confident that extending this easement for an additional 18
months represents the best outcome for the industry. The noble
Lord, , asked what the point of
consulting is if we just ignore the results; I think there is a
legitimate expectation that government will consult on matters of
policy or legislative change to allow interested parties and
citizens the opportunity to contribute their views. They are a
vital part of how government engages with the public and
stakeholders, and we have to acknowledge the role they play in
decision-making. However, they are only one factor among many
that must be considered and it is important that the Government
retain the ability to make different decisions where other
concerns need to be taken into account. The Government have the
luxury of seeing the bigger picture, which local residents who
object perhaps do not.
My noble friends Lady McIntosh and Lord Smith and the noble Lord,
, made some very good points
about the importance of the hospitality sector to the country and
the difficulties it is facing. It continues to feel the effects
of the coronavirus pandemic; there are no remaining restrictions
in place, but many businesses continue to face significant debt
burdens, as the noble Lord, , pointed out, as a result of
the pandemic. Industry survey data shows that the hospitality
sector emerged from the pandemic with, as has been noted, £10
billion of Covid-related debt. ONS data shows that 6.6% of
hospitality firms reported that their debt repayments exceeded
100% of their turnover in July 2023, which is above the
economy-wide average of 1.9% and up from 5.1% in May 2023.
Operating costs reached record levels in 2021 at 55.2%, compared
with 52.5% pre pandemic. Industry data suggests that, while
turnover was up 6.7% in the last year to £137 billion, when
compared to 2019 it remains almost 20% behind in real terms when
accounting for inflation. Following the withdrawal of
Covid-related government support in autumn 2021, the number of
hospitality business insolvencies has steadily risen, as my noble
friend Lord Smith noted. According to Insolvency Service data,
hospitality insolvencies in the six months to July 2023 were 58%
higher than the 2019 average, as cost pressures place significant
demand on profit margins. I think that makes a clear economic
case for the reasons and rationale behind doing this now.
A number of noble Lords asked about our long-term plans and
ultimate goal, which is to create a unified pavement licence that
includes licensing consent for the consumption and sale of
alcohol in the outside pavement area. The Home Office is working
on a permanent solution in conjunction with the Department for
Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, which is responsible for
pavement licensing. While related to these regulations, this is
ultimately a separate issue that will be worked through over the
coming months. I hope that noble Lords will understand that I
cannot discuss that work in any detail at the moment, but I very
much noted what my noble friend said about the experience of
the Lionesses and will make sure that that is passed back, in
particular what he was saying about how common sense
prevailed.
My noble friend also mentioned licensing extensions in relation
to that situation. As he noted, extensions of licensing hours
support communities who wish to come together to celebrate
events, particularly those of national importance, by enabling
hospitality venues to open for longer. We are looking at how best
to streamline that process for such extensions and will continue
to do so.
I understand that any relaxation of licensing law naturally
results in concerns about potential crime and disorder, but I can
provide your Lordships with considerable reassurance on this
point. We have consulted the National Police Chiefs’ Council
about the effects that the temporary off-sales permission has
had. The view of the police is that the temporary off-sales
permission has not caused any clearly identifiable increase in
crime and disorder.
On concerns raised about premises whose irresponsible approach to
off-sales leads to anti-social behaviour, I refer the Committee
to Section 76 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing
Act 2014, which provides councils and policing with powers to
issue a closure notice if there are reasonable grounds that
“use of a particular premises has resulted, or … is likely … to
result, in nuisance to members of the public, or that there has
been, or … is likely soon to be, disorder near those premises
associated with the use of the premises, and that the notice is
necessary to prevent the nuisance or disorder from continuing,
recurring or occurring”.
I hope that answers the point from the noble Baroness, Lady
Finlay, about crime and the powers that are already available to
have an effect on the grant of these types of licence.
Concerns were also voiced about the off-sales permission leading
to excessive noise late at night. The temporary off-sales
permission is limited to the hours of on-sales permitted by the
licence, with the cut-off at 11 pm. That applies to all premises
that receive the permission. Furthermore, should issues of noise
and nuisance arise from off-sales of alcohol, environmental
health officials can seek an expedited off-sales review. Within
48 hours of an application for such a review being made, the
licensing authority must consider whether interim steps are
necessary to prevent further problems. Those interim steps may
modify the licence conditions, suspend the off-sales permission
or exclude the off-sales permission altogether. A review hearing
within 28 days has the same option. So there are plenty of
safeguards that are sufficient to ensure that problems of noise
and nuisance are quickly tackled.
The noble Lord, , asked me about broader work
to tackle alcohol-related harms. Preventing alcohol-related harms
requires a sustained commitment from across government, but also
from local authorities, the police, health partners—to which I
have already referred—and, of course, businesses. There really is
no easy answer to tackling alcohol-related harms. Every part of
the system, from early intervention to brief advice, treatment
and access to criminal justice powers, has to work together. We
have an ambitious programme of work in train across departments
to tackle these harms and I am sure that we will respond to them
in due course.
My noble friend Lord Bourne raised some very good points in his
question about the lessons learned more broadly from Covid. I am
not in a position to guarantee him the debate that he seeks,
although I think it is a very good idea, but I point to the way
things are changing at pace. I happened to read an interesting
article in the Times this morning, which talked about working
from home and how, apparently, a majority are now working back in
their offices— I believe that that was from Hays, the employment
agency. That should be good news for the sort of hospitality
services that we are talking about, but I accept and respect the
point he made about the fact that society changed in many ways
that we ought to spend more time considering, particularly
regarding the overall volunteering principle and the civic
responsibilities that so many people embraced. Those were good
points and we should return to them.
I have spoken enough and answered as many questions as I can. I
cannot make any commitment on the agent of change principle,
which my noble friend Lady McIntosh asked about, but it is a
broad-ranging consultation and work is being done across
government on it. I have no doubt at all that it will be
considered.
As I said, the hospitality industry is at the heart of many of
our communities. It is vital to our economy, as evidenced by the
numbers I read, provides employment and boosts tourism. We have
to do all we can to ensure it recovers from the effects of the
pandemic. The modest extension will allow businesses to continue
to benefit from these measures while steps are taken to put in
place a long-term solution. I hope that will meet the needs of
all interested parties. Therefore, I commend the regulations to
the Committee.
Motion agreed.
|
