< Previous | Contents | Next >
The Licensing (Scotland) Bill: A Consultation on Liquor Licensing
Chapter 6
Communities
We heard from many communities throughout Scotland during the consultation
on the Antisocial Behaviour, etc (Scotland) Bill of their real concerns that
some licensed premises can affect the quality of life in our neighbourhoods.
We believe that it is important that people have a real voice in the decisions
affecting their community. This in part influenced the First Minister to set
up the Working Group on Off-sales in the Community (The Daniels Committee) to
develop further some of the Nicholson Committee's proposals. Both sets of proposals
are summarised below followed by our preferred approach.
The Nicholson Report
The Nicholson Committee recommends the continuation of the basic approach taken
in the current legislation with a statutory prescribed list of those entitled
to object to the grant of an application for a premises licence. This list would
include community councils, property owners, residents, tenants and established
religions with property 'in or near' the neighbourhood. The Committee acknowledges
some shortcomings and suggests improvements to the existing definitions of neighbourhood
to ensure the inclusion of those people who were not immediately adjacent yet
may be subject to undesirable disturbances caused by the patrons of such licensed
premises. However, the key issue would be formal residence within the local
area.
The Committee recommends that those with a formal role in the system including
the Chief Constable, the fire authority and any official of the local authority
who has an interest should no longer be entitled to object but could submit
observations or representations to a Licensing Board in respect of any application.
The Board would be able to act on such observations in the same manner as objections.
Local authorities would no longer be competent objectors.
Of course there are other Nicholson proposals which would also develop the
community's role. These include the proposal to set up Local Licensing Fora
which would include representation from the community. The Committee sees resident's
groups or associations as important contributors to the local Forum.
The proposed new Liquor Licensing Standards Officers, who would be employed
to supervise and monitor the system's operation, would provide a route for mediation
between local communities and licensees, addressing any local difficulties directly
and working to resolve them. They would also provide, ultimately, a route for
investigation of more formal complaints and be able to initiate a hearing by
the Licensing Board.
Also recommended is the production of a booklet by the Scottish Executive setting
out in clear and simple terms the relevant law and procedures to be followed
in proceedings before Licensing Boards.
The Daniels Report
The Daniels Committee feels that the Nicholson Committee's recommendations
on objections do not go far enough. They do not completely resolve the uncertainty
over whether all those individuals or community organisations with a legitimate
interest would be able to object. The entitlement to object would still hinge
on the interpretations of such words as 'in or near' the neighbourhood of a
licensed premises. The Daniels Committee wishes to ensure that any individual
or community group which could demonstrate an interest should have an equal
right to be heard. They therefore recommend that the scope of those able to
object to a new application for a premises licence should be simplified and
widened to anyone who could demonstrate 'a real and material interest',
following as a model the relevant objection provisions of the Civic Government
(Scotland) Act 1982.
The Committee also recommends that certain people or groups designated as 'statutory
consultees' should, in addition to the entitlement to object, be entitled to
receive written notice of an application. They suggest the following:
- any person owning or occupying property that is coterminous or within 4
metres of the premises to which the application applies;
- the community council for the area in which the premises is situated;
- the Chief Constable;
- the fire authority; and
- relevant departments of the local authority, particularly environmental
health, building control and, possibly, trading standards.
In particular the Committee believes that community councils should be sent
a copy of an application at the outset without the need as at present to make
a request for such information.
The Group also recommends that people should be given the chance to make representations
or objections. They feel that many people do not want to simply object to
a premises but want greater consideration given to certain aspects of the licence
such as closing times. Allowing representations to be made rather than objections
could allow for a less confrontational approach.
Consultation Summary
The majority of respondents were positive towards the Nicholson Committee's
recommendations to extend the range of people or bodies that can object. Most
also felt that the suggested changes remained restrictive, with suggestions
for extending the range of possible objectors to premises users and to local
elected members including MSPs and councillors. Others suggested that any individual
or group of individuals should be free to make an objection if they were affected
in any way by the granting or alteration of a licence.
Our Approach
In considering the role of communities within the licensing system, we believe
it is important that they have a role in commenting on and helping to develop
local policy and that an appropriate range of people have an opportunity
to make their views known to the Board in relation to individual licences and
licence applications.
The community role is relevant not only to the grant of licences but where
problems arise with existing licences. We support the approach taken by the
Daniels Committee of widening the entitlement to object and make representations
to anybody who can show a 'real and material interest'. This would apply to
all licensed premises. In addition, we support those additional elements of
the Nicholson proposals which will be the key to ensuring the community also
has a voice when problems arise.
We support the proposal to give communities a role in commenting on wider
policy decisions through the establishment of local licensing fora (as set out
in Chapter 2). It will be important that the
local forum is as representative as possible of the local community to ensure
that a range of views is taken into account. This should reflect, for example,
the views of local residents, local licensees, young people (through links with
youth fora) and the local Alcohol Action Team.
Following our own consideration of the ECHR issues involved, we are of the
opinion that local authorities may continue to make objections to licences.
We believe that the 1976 Act is inadequate in allowing all those people who
have a legitimate interest to make their views known. People are subject to
the very restrictive definition of 'neighbourhood' which has often led to the
complete exclusion of some groups of people who should have a voice within the
system. This has led, for example, to the exclusion of groups representing local
schools.
This approach does not mean that communities will be given a veto over the
establishment of licensed premises in their area.
The proposed new system would widen the range of people who are in a
position to make their views known since this would depend on your legitimate
interest in the issue rather than demonstrating that you are an immediate neighbour.
However, objections cannot be frivolous or irrelevant - they would have to relate
to one of the grounds under which the Board is permitted to refuse applications.
Those grounds are set out in full in Chapter 4 but
include an application which is contrary to the five licensing principles:
(a) the prevention of crime or disorder;
(b) the promotion of public safety;
(c) the prevention of public nuisance;
(d) the promotion of public health; and
(e) the protection of children from harm.
It would still be for the Licensing Board to take the decision, weighing up
the objections and representations from the community against all other relevant
factors, as they do now.
We believe that the combination of the Daniels approach to objections and representations
and the other elements of the Nicholson proposals will lead to a much improved
position for local communities. The following example shows how this could be
expected to work.
|
EXAMPLE
A single street has several bars and the local residents are already
unhappy about the noise and disorder occurring along the street during
weekday evenings when many of the bars run events to attract customers.
Not all of the bars employ door staff and customers are taking alcohol
outside the premises and dropping glass in the street. Some of those customers
appear to be under age. An application is then submitted to the Licensing
Board to turn an unused retail outlet on the street into a multi-bar venue.
Our proposals could address this situation in a number of ways:
New Licence
Licensing Boards would have already carried out an overprovision assessment
using guidance developed by the National Licensing Forum and in consultation
with the local community, police and licensed trade. This would enable
the Board to judge whether there were already sufficient licences within
the area and to make this clear in their policy statement. If the Board
had already decided that the area was overprovided for, the licence application
would be rejected.
If the Board believed there was room for another establishment, it
would be able to advertise the application for objections and representations
and take a decision based on the licensing principles. Anyone with a 'real
and material interest' could make their views known.
If the Board decided to grant the licence it could impose appropriate
conditions on the licence to ensure the licensing principles were adhered
to and to reduce nuisance and disturbance to the local community. This
could include hours appropriate for the area and other appropriate local
conditions as well as any relevant standard national conditions. In imposing
such conditions, the Board would be able to take into account the views
of local residents, the police and the local authority's environmental
health officers amongst others.
Existing Problems
The community might want to take action to address the existing problems
of noise and local disturbance.
The first step would be for any member of the community to contact
the local Liquor Licensing Standards Officer to discuss the problem. The
LLSO would liaise with the licensees and seek to find a solution. He could
also liaise with other agencies such as the local authority's environmental
health department. He would use his experience of resolving problems in
other premises and his knowledge of the Board's policies. The LLSO would
point out that licensees are breaching the terms of their licence if they
do not comply with a no-proof no-sale policy and ask for proof of age.
A meeting could be arranged between the community and licensees with the
LLSO serving as mediator. Options, such as the use of door staff, could
be discussed. The licensee could suggest alternative solutions.
If informal mediation and discussion were unsuccessful, and the LLSO
felt that the licensee was breaching the terms of his licence, the LLSO
could consider other action. An oral warning might be given requiring
the licensee to take certain steps. This could be followed by a written
warning and, ultimately, an oral hearing by the Licensing Board initiated
by a complaint from the LLSO or from anyone entitled to object. The Board
would weigh up the evidence from the licensee and the objectors and could
decide to impose an appropriate sanction ranging from amending licence
conditions to suspension or revocation of the licence.
In most cases we would expect that compromise at local level between
responsible licensees and community members should resolve problems without
the need for a formal complaints process. The formal process is available
when it is needed but also offers a range of options designed to reduce
confrontation and resolve the problem at the lowest possible level in
the interests of both the licensed trade and the community.
|
We can also confirm that the Scottish Executive will, in conjunction with the
National Licensing Forum, seek to publish a basic guide to liquor licensing
containing relevant information for both applicants and objectors.
|
Your Views
We would welcome your views on the following:
Objections and Representations
- Should we widen the range of people who are in a position to object
legitimately to a premises licence application by allowing anyone with
a real and material interest to forward objections or representations
for consideration by the Licensing Board?
- Should immediate neighbours, community councils, the Chief Constable,
fire authority and relevant departments of the local authority be entitled
to receive written notice of an application from the Licensing Board?
- Is a radius of 4 metres sufficient to define those neighbours entitled
to receive written notice or should this be wider?
|
< Previous | Contents | Next > | 
