Select Committee on Office of the Deputy Prime Minister: Housing, Planning, Local Government and the Regions Written Evidence


Memorandum from the British Institute of Innkeeping (BII) (RL 08)

  The BII, the professional body for the licensed retail sector, welcomes the opportunity to comment on the way in which the re-licensing process under the Licensing Act 2003 has been implemented. We would like to be considered as a witness for this hearing on 31 October.

BACKGROUND TO THE BII

  The BII is the professional body for the whole of the licensed retail sector and currently has a membership of 17,400 individual members made up of managers, staff, licensees and tenants from both the on and off sectors. We are also supported by 50 Corporate Patrons and Members who contribute to furthering our main mission which is to:

    "Promote high standards of professionalism throughout the licensed retail sector, to encourage new entrants into the industry and to help them develop their long-term careers. To provide all our members with high quality information, skills and qualifications to help them succeed in their business activities."

  As a professional body therefore we are fully committed to maintaining the highest possible standards throughout our industry. We set and maintain standards through our wholly owned Awarding Body, the BIIAB. All individual members sign up to our Code of Conduct, which reinforces the professional message that we deliver.

  Our qualifications cover a wide range of areas specifically for licensed retail, including full regulatory qualifications such as the National Certificate for Licensees (now replaced by the National Certificate for Personal Licence Holders), the National Certificate for Door Supervisors and the Barperson's National Certificate. We also deliver a wide range of business competence qualifications to assist our members in developing and improving their business performance.

  In 2004 we processed 134,745 individual qualifications and since 1992 we have awarded over 600,000 qualifications.

COMMENTS ON THE RE -LICENSING PROCESS UNDER THE LICENSING ACT 2003

  1.  The transition phase has prompted an increase in work for local authorities including setting up new departments but this will not continue at this level into future years. Therefore we believe that the first year's fees should cover the initial work but will become a revenue raising exercise in subsequent years.

  2.  In this transition year, there has been a huge increase in monetary and time costs associated with the system to licensees. These costs are incurred through advertising, legal fees for a solicitor used to make the application, cost of preparation of plans as well as the licence fee itself. It should be borne in mind that historically, licensees without a Public Entertainment Licence (PEL) were liable to pay £30 for a three year justices' licence. Whilst some of the extra burden is limited to transition, we still believe that the new fees scale for the average pub is still too high, whilst those for more complex, larger entertainment premises are too low.

  3.  One of the causes for late submission was the lack of financial incentive. There was no discount for early payment in transition—so what about offering a discount for early payment in 2006 and beyond?

  4.  The licensed trade is unique as its rateable value is based on turnover rather than square footage of the outlet, like other retail businesses. If levels were set by square footage then the bigger premises would pay more than smaller premises. The introduction of more bands would help especially with more complex premises. For example a nightclub in Westminster paid £20k for a Public Entertainment Licence under the old regime will now be paying the same as a much smaller venue. In our view the top bands are too low and the lower bands too high.

  5.  The BII believes that the best way for a uniform system is for it to be set by central Government and not devolved to local authorities. A standard application process should be applied across the country to avoid local authorities complicating the process by applying their own interpretation and stipulations. The application form needs to be in plain English to accommodate those people for whom English is not their first language or whose literacy levels are not high.

  6.  In conclusion, the licensed trade was assured by the Government that the new fees structure would be no more expensive under local authorities than under magistrates and that over the next 10 years the new system would save the licensed trade £2 billion. In the face of the evidence above we do not believe this assertion to be true. The new system has been both more time consuming and more costly to an industry that already contributes 5% of the country's GDP and pays £22 billion pa to the Exchequer.


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2006
Prepared 17 March 2006