« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER 6 Off-Sales Licensing Law
6.1 International perspective
Alcohol policy around the world shows comparable licensing restrictions for off-sales. The most common policy is to limit the places where alcohol can be sold (e.g. the location must not exceed certain distance boundaries from a school/place of worship - normally 500m), which is practiced in most countries. Furthermore, some countries were shown to limit the hours of sale, restrict the days of sale, and also regulate the density of alcohol retailers (typically, Sweden, Finland and Norway) (Alcohol Policy, 2006). However, a cluster of central and eastern European countries do not share these restrictions (Austria, the Czech Republic, Germany, Luxembourg and Slovakia), together with several southern European countries (Portugal, Italy and Greece).
All countries exercise access restrictions to alcohol in some way; with a minimum age of 16-20 years to buy alcohol in bars (this consistency is seen to differ for off-sales purchases) 19. Furthermore, as previously mentioned, there are instances of targeted taxes in a number of countries - namely in response to young people's preference for certain types of drinks. France, Switzerland, Germany and Denmark have employed this intervention, with relative success (Babor, 2003).
Overall, areas where countries are relatively similar include policies concerning drink driving, licences for alcohol sales, and the existence of a minimum age at which alcohol can be purchased in bars. However, wide differences can be seen in the enforcement of the exact age at which people can buy alcohol (particularly in off-sales), limits on availability and advertising restrictions (Sewell, 2002).
6.2 Changes in English licensing laws
The table below outlines the major changes between the old and new laws in England. 20
Table 4: Major changes in English licensing law
OLD SYSTEM | NEW SYSTEM |
|---|
Magistrates have responsibility for alcohol licensing (Liquor licences and Restaurant licences) Local authorities have responsibility for entertainment licences and night café licences | Local authorities responsible for all alcohol and entertainments licensing (liquor, restaurant, entertainment and night café licences). Approx. 3,600 existing licences in Westminster. |
Separate licences for cinema, theatre, sale of alcohol, public entertainment, etc. | One premises licence to cover all activities and no additional licence costs for more than one activity. |
Individuals licensed to sell alcohol from particular premises. | Separate premises and portable personal licence. |
Applicants for licences have to prove themselves fit and proper. | New applicants for personal licences need to gain an accredited qualification and obtain a criminal conviction certificate or a criminal record certificate or the results of a subject access search of the police national computer by the National Intelligence Service (or words to that effect). |
Public entertainment fees set by individual local authorities. | Fees set by Government for premises and personal licences. |
Two in a bar rule means that where more than two artists perform, a public entertainment licence is required. | All public entertainment will normally require a licence, but entertainment consisting of the performance of live music will not need a licence where it is incidental to other activities. |
The law regarding children's access to licensed premises is confusing and inconsistent. | Children's access will be the norm, except where there is a good reason for them being excluded - balanced by clear objective of protection of children from harm. |
The law concerning consumption of alcohol by under 18s in public places is confusing and unrealistic for example it is legal to buy an alcoholic drink and give it to a six year old in a public garden. | 16 and 17 year olds will only be able to consume alcohol in pubs when it is bought for them by someone 18 years old or older, and is consumed with a meal in the company of someone 18 or over. |
Licences are required for tombolas and raffles where alcohol is offered as a prize. | Tombolas or raffles will be exempted from the requirements for a licence is most cases |
Anyone wishing to hold a one-off event must apply for an occasional permission from the Court. | A new system of temporary permitted activities will allow extensions for premises licences, (for example a big sporting event or a wedding) and the sale of alcohol by non-licence holders within permitted limits after a simple notification |
Anyone can sell alcohol in wholesale quantities to the public without a licence | The exception for wholesale will only apply to sales between businesses or to personal or premises licence holders. |
There is broad discretion for licensing authorities on the reasons for making licensing decisions. | There will be four specific licensing objectives on which all decisions in relation to licensing applications must be based. |
Alcohol can only be served within specific limited permitted hours, subject to some extensions being obtained. | Permitted hours will be abolished and each licensed premises will choose its own hours of opening, subject to there being no objections from others. |
Police powers to close relate only to permanent on-licensed premises | Police powers to close premises extended to all temporary events such as one-off raves |
The media focus for the Licensing Act 2003 has concentrated upon potential 24 hour opening, what is clear however, is that it has opened the door to longer hours and the increased availability of alcohol. There are elements of the bill that could be extremely positive; such as the introduction of server training, the curtailment of 'happy hours' and constraints on the overprovision of licensed premises (Evening Times, 2004; BBC News, 2005).
There is varying evidence to support increases in licensing restrictions of alcohol. Evidence based on current practice concerning licensing of alcohol shows a mixed result. For example, in Australia, Ireland, Iceland and Canada the extension of opening times and availability of alcohol have led to an increase in violence, alcohol consumption and drunkenness (Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, 2005). While in Norway, Finland and Sweden there was a decrease in consumption of heavy drinkers (Holder et al, 1998).
Central to this seems to be the drinking culture; where there is a culture of binge drinking; extended opening hours seems to encourage consumption of alcohol. In general for the UK there is some indication to suggest that extended licensing hours may be linked to increased problems with alcohol related crime and disorder (Babor, 2003). However, Barnardo's Scotland believe it is important to 'normalise' drinking habits so children grow up with a 'responsible and healthy attitude to drink' hence they support the relaxation of opening times as they feel the correlations between alcohol and aggression will not be solved by imposing '…draconian licensing restrictions', but, any changes in law must be supported by appropriate education, prevention, treatment and support (Barnardo's, 2003).
A review in Scotland investigated the perceptions and attitudes of the public to changes in licensing laws. The majority of interviewees expressed that an extension to licensing laws would do nothing to change the current situation surrounding problem drinking. Rather, alcohol was seen as a substance that is already readily available (Lancaster and Dudleston, 2002).
There is limited literature discussing the effects of the English Licensing changes as it has only fairly recently been implemented, and it is reported that there are also difficulties surrounding analysis of the impact due to the introduction of the Act being accompanied by a major Alcohol Misuse Enforcement Campaign ( AMEC). It is, therefore, difficult to separate the effects of the Licensing Act from those of the AMEC campaign ( IAS, 2006a + b).
Since the Act came into force, early indications show no change in the overall level or a shift in the times of offences. Abolishing fixed closing times does not seem to have reduced crime and disorder as originally intended ( IAS 2006b).
A discussion paper by McNeill (2005) providing a critique of the assumptions underlying the Licensing Act 2003 outlines his strong reservations about the de-regulation of on-trade closing times.
« Previous | Contents | Next »