Licensing Act 'shambles' slated by MPs

The House of Commons committee which reviews the work of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has strongly criticised the Government’s introduction of the new Licensing Act. The cross party committee looked at the process of re-licensing which local authorities, the new licensing authorities, had to carry out over a six month period, and identified a catalogue of errors and failings on the part of the Department of Culture (DCMS), the government department responsible. The committee says that these errors caused ‘unnecessary stress on all parties involved’.

A particular cause of criticism was that, although the Licensing Act was passed in 2003, the Statutory Guidance issued by the Secretary of State Tessa Jowell, designed to tell the licensing authorities how they should interpret and apply the new Act, was not produced by DCMS until two years later. The committee also complain that when the Guidance finally appeared it was in places vague and inconsistent, and not altogether compatible with the Act itself.

The committee’s chairman, Dr Phyllis Starkey MP, said: “The last details were only produced three weeks before the process (of re-licensing) had to begin and local authorities of course were then in difficulty in setting up their councillors’ licensing panels, in training the councillors and in training their staff to deal with it.” “ There was a six month period when pubs and clubs could apply for a licence, once they’d applied the licences had to be determined within two months by local authorities,” she explained.

“Another criticism we’ve made is that there should have been a financial incentive to encourage pubs and clubs to apply early so that the burden of work of the licensing panels would have been more spread out.

“And the consequence of all those things was that councils often had to determine applications within the two months period without being able to give them sufficiently detailed examination and either refused licences when they might not have done or approved them without being able to look at them carefully enough.

“Also the whole thing put enormous strain on local authorities and local authority members, particularly those local authorities like Westminster which have a very large number of pubs and clubs within their area.”

Conservative Shadow Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Hugo Swire, said: “Clearly the Government’s handling of the new licensing laws has been a shambles, and it is local authorities, village halls and community centres who are left to deal with the mess and the bill. Ultimately, council tax payers will be left paying for the Government’s mistakes.

“At times, the Department has seemed gripped by inertia and has refused to see the scale of the chaos before them. Most worrying is the admission that some licence applications were granted without being examined, even though the Government promised that residents would have a greater say in opposing rowdy pubs.”

Confirming its status as the Act that failed to satisfy anyone, Nick Bish of The Association of Licensed Multiple Retailers, one of the main alcohol industry groups, agreed that errors made by the DCMS‘ severely let down’ licensees.

Mr. Bish said: “We whole-heartedly support and endorse the Committee’s analysis of the problems faced by all sides in managing the introduction of the new Licensing Act. This was a complex piece of legislation and the Government let us all down by failing to provide clear, timely advice. We warned DCMS at the time that problems would emerge, but I’m afraid our advice was ignored.”

A DCM S spokesman said: “Of course, as with any major transition process, there are lessons to be learned and we will consider the committee’s report carefully.“It is important to remember that the Licensing Act was the biggest overhaul of licensing laws in a generation. It is now delivering a better deal for the public, industry and enforcement authorities.”