« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
THE LICENSING (SCOTLAND) BILL: AN ANALYSIS OF CONSULTATION RESPONSES
FOURTEEN: MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS
41. We would like to hear further views on the merits of preventing petrol stations from selling alcohol and whether we can limit such sales to those premises which provide an important community function as the local shop.
14.1 Seventy-nine consultees, across the board, including all the licensing boards who participated, provided some comment on this question. It was not always simple to determine whether the consultee had a definite view on this issue, but the vast majority of comments conveyed an opinion that premises selling petrol should be allowed to sell alcohol if their primary function was as a community shop, but petrol stations or motorway service stations should not. This was particularly relevant for rural areas. Others observed that there is no connection between drink-driving and petrol station purchases and that to refuse licences to shops selling petrol would be illogical given that alcohol can be purchased by drivers at other outlets.
14.2 A number of consultees mentioned the need to base a definition of suitable and unsuitable outlets on the proportion of the business that was based on the sale of petrol.
42. Should the police be provided with power to seek a court order banning the sale of alcohol for certain train lines at certain times where they are a persistent source of nuisance and disorder?
14.3 An overwhelming majority of the sixty-one responses were in agreement. One council that agreed in part thought that strict tests would have to be met before any order could be granted to the police. A police organisation and DAAT, which were in partial agreement, felt that, rather than prohibit sales on certain train lines through the use of a court order, legislation should be introduced to allow the imposition of such prohibitions in a similar manner to police powers to stop and search people and vehicles.
14.4 A consultee in agreement with the proposal recommended that a ban on consumption would be more appropriate; banning the sale of alcohol would be pointless as passengers could take their own alcohol or already be inebriated when they boarded. Several comments suggested that alcohol consumption on trains was no longer the problem it had been once.
43. Should passenger ships and boats be included in the licensing system where journeys are between points in Scotland?
14.5 Only fifty per cent of all those who took part in the consultation addressed this question, a majority of these being in favour of inclusion, although many called for greater clarity of terms and noted potential jurisdictional difficulties in enforcing licensing for vessels that could move between different board areas. Several commented that the sale of alcohol anywhere should be brought under the system and staff appropriately trained.
14.6 One respondent rejected the proposal on several grounds. Passenger ferries and similar vessels, as distinct from those involved in pleasure excursions (like booze cruises and mobile parties), were thought to be the wrong target and they were unaware of there being a problem in the Scottish shipping sector and believed that, like trains, these services should be outside the scope of the legislation. It was noted that not only could sea journeys traverse multiple licensing board areas, but that routes could suddenly alter because of weather or technical problems. It was pointed out that provisions in existing maritime legislation already covered the safety of passengers and crew, and that there could be conflicts of authority between police officers, LLSOs, maritime bodies and the ship's master.
44. Do you agree that wholesalers should be brought within the licensing system?
14.7 A range of consultees who disagreed (about one tenth of the 72 responses which included this proposal) did not perceive there to be a need for a change in the legislation. The few additional comments from those in agreement pointed out that high standards of responsible retailing should consistently applied throughout the supply chain, wholesalers had become more accessible to the buying public than they once were, contributing to the problems of bootlegging and smuggling; and they could not currently be included in board calculations of over-provision. A couple of respondents suggested that wholesalers should be required to check that those to whom they are selling should have a licence to sell alcohol.
45. Should those who run mail order, telephone and Internet alcohol sales businesses be required to hold a personal licence?
14.8 The vast majority of 71 consultees who commented on this agreed with the proposal. It was suggested that someone within the business should hold a personal licence and be appropriately trained. The probable difficulty of enforcing such was raised by a few consultees. One dissenter thought that a personal licence would be inappropriate given there is no direct interface with the customer, and that, as in England and Wales, the place from which the alcohol was delivered should have a premises licence instead.
46. Should their storage premises be required to have a premises licence?
14.9 There were few extended comments on this from the 65 who included it in their consultation submissions. Three quarters agreed, welcoming regulation in this area. More than a third of those who dissented were licensing boards, and the others were trade representatives and three alcohol/drug action teams, who saw no need for this. It was noted that many suppliers would have their storage outside of Scotland and that other storage-only premises (such as supermarket warehouses) are not currently licensed.
« Previous | Contents | Next »