UK licensing reform ‘a mistake’

The end of 24 hour licensing is in sight in the UK, following the defeat of the Labour Party in the general election and the arrival of a new Coalition government comprising the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Parties.

On taking office the new government was quick to announce that the previous government’s Licensing Act would be re-balanced in favour of local communities, with local licensing authorities being given more powers to control the number and trading hours of licensed outlets.

It is widely accepted in the UK that the Labour Government’s Licensing Act, which took effect in 2005, failed to deliver the new ‘continental café’ drinking culture that was promised. In what already has come to seem a rather strange episode in the history of UK alcohol policy, the Labour government based its reforms on the assumption that it was artificially restricted opening hours that had played a key role in creating a culture of binge drinking, and that extending drinking hours would therefore have the effect of civilizing drinking habits and reducing the problems of large scale drunken behaviour in the night time economy.

The current political and popular consensus is that, in making these assumptions, the Labour government was being at best somewhat naïve.

One Labour Party elder statesman and former deputy leader of the Party, Lord Hatteresely, went on record describing the introduction of 24-h

our licensing as New Labour at its silliest. Lord Hattersley added: “Looking back to 2003, when the new and undeniably disastrous licensing law was passed, it is almost impossible to understand why New Labour ministers expected anything except a rise in alcohol-related crime and nights of misery for honest citizens who lived near pubs, clubs and wine bars. The only answer to the conundrum is that this ghastly error represented New Labour at its silliest, as personified by Tessa Jowell, then the Secretary of State for Culture Media and Sport, who pioneered the legislation and took responsibility for its implementation.”

Police also attack new Licensing Act Police chiefs as well as politicians have also started to criticise the Labour Government’s licensing reforms. Sir Hugh Orde, President of the Association of Chief Police Officers agreed with the Coalition government’s view that the new licensing act was a mistake. And Sir Hugh told the BBC that those who benefited from longer licensing hours should help pay for the extra policing required.

Sir Hugh told the Andrew Marr Show: “I think 24-hour drinking frankly was probably a mistake. The culture in the UK is different from other parts of Europe, where it is far less threatening and far more successful. We need to take that legislation away and indeed I would welcome the notion that if we have longer licensing hours the people making the money pay for some of the policing that has to be put in place to keep those people safe when they’re out under the influence of alcohol.”

KENT police agreed. Ian Pointon, Chairman of the Kent Police Federation, said latenight drinking had created more problems than it had solved and had resulted in fewer officers being available to fight crime during the day.

Speaking to local media, Mr Pointon said: “I think the introduction of 24-hour drinking without the requisite change in culture was a mistake.

“The idea was that we would somehow develop a Continental café culture but that hasn’t happened, especially in town centres.

“The feedback from officers is that they’ve had more problems since the 24-hour laws came in.

“They’re also working into the early hours, which means they’re not available at other times of the day when the public would like to see them. “It’s time to have a long, hard look at the licensing hours coupled with the drinking culture in this country.”

Mr Pointon’s criticism of 24- hour drinking is shared by Kent’s former Chief Constable, Mike Fuller, who had warned against its introduction in an interview with local Kent in January, 2005.