Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Blakemore, Councillor Naylor, Councillor Thornton and Councillor Treble.

Members are asked to declare any interests in matters for consideration at the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 10 May 2011 - attached.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 10 May 2011 be received and approved and the Chairman be authorised to sign them.

This report seeks to update and remind members of recent and important amendments made to the Licensing Act 2003 by the following recent legislation:

Police Reform & Social Responsibilities Act 2011

The Magistrates’ Courts (Drinking Banning Orders) Rules 2009

Report of the Licensing Team Leader attached.

RESOLVED that the changed to the Licensing Act 2003 be NOTED.

This report seeks the committee’s views on the proposed response to the Home Office consultation on amending the licensable activity of Regulated Entertainment.

Report of the Licensing Team Leader attached.

Following questions from members of the committee, the meeting was advised that:

·         The Council was not circulating the Department of Culture, Media and Sport’s (DCMS) consultation; it was already publicly available with a list of those being consulted included.

·         The government was not proposing to deregulate premises where alcohol was being sold, only those where it was not.

·         Alcohol associations were also being consulted.

·         The consumption of alcohol was not a licensable activity, which meant that alcohol could be purchased and taken onto a site where an event was taking place.

·         There were to no longer be agreed decibel limits placed on sites where events were taking place, although the Environmental Protection Act would still apply.

·         Events with over 4999 attendees would still require permission.

·         The Council could request a lower limit in its response, but in doing so, ask for events such as school plays be exempted.

·         Asking for a donation towards the cost of alcohol was still classed as a sale and therefore would need a licence.

·         Richmond upon Thames was one of the few authorities that currently restricted the number of patrons on a premises when alcohol was being sold.

·         The Licensing department readily received applications for Temporary Event Notices (TEN) and would assist those completing them.

·         The British Board of Film Classification’s certificate for each film could be overridden by the Council, where an applicant wanted to show it on their premises.

·         The cost of a TEN application was £21.00, although if the event was to have over 499 patrons attending, there would be a need to submit a full application.

·         The Council would not be seeking opinions on the DCMS’s consultation from other organisations; it was the Council’s response and other organisations could respond in their own capacity.

·         Fees for licenses would be likely to increase, as the current fees set by statute did not reflect the cost of processing applications.

The following views were expressed by members of the committee:

·         There was concern that authorities and interested parties would no longer have a say on some occasionally sizeable events.

·         The limit for events should be in line with that of a TEN and restricted to a maximum of 499 attendees.

·         If there was to not be a need for event organisers to obtain a licence for events under 5000 attendees, there should still be a responsibility for them to inform relevant authorities of a large public gathering

·         Should a limit of 499 attendees be placed on events, there should be exceptions for occasions such as school plays or other such community/not-for-profit events.

·         There should be more definitive statements in the amended Act, as this would eliminate the need for interpretation.

RESOLVED that:

1.      the committee’s comments be considered when formulating the consultation response;

2.      committee members have sight of a final draft before submission to the Chairman and Vice-Chairman for agreement;

3.      the Chairman and Vice-Chairman agree a final response with relevant officers prior to submission before the consultation deadline.