Memorandum submitted by Lynsey Pitt (PC 21)

 

 

1. Executive Summary

 

1.1 The current licensing system for lap dancing clubs is urgently in need of reform. Despite providing visual entertainment for sexual stimulation lap dancing clubs require only a Premises Licence for the provision of alcohol. This has left local authorities unable to act on the concerns of residents and unable to adequately monitor such venues. Clause 25 attempts to address these problems by giving local authorities new powers in the licensing of lap dancing clubs. However, the clause is fundamentally undermined by the fact that licensing reforms will not be applied universally across licensing authorities. It is also undermined by a loophole which will allow premises holding lap dancing less frequently than once a month to continue doing so with just a Premises Licence.

 

1.2 I, Lindsey Pitt, call on the Policing and Crime Bill Committee to amend Clause 25 by making the reforms mandatory and removing 'the less than once a month' exemption.

 

2. About my situation.

2.1 I live in a residential area in West Kensington, W14. At the bottom of my road is a pub (formerly known as The Fox Tavern, now known as The Crescent) that has applied for a licence variation to permit lap-dancing seven nights a week. The pub is next to a library open in the evenings, and within 300-400 yards of 3 schools. When residents found out about the prospective licence, they sent in over 1,000 objections (out of around 2,000 affected households). We strongly oppose a lap-dancing club in this area, but we are hampered by existing legislation in winning our case. The applicant is taking his licence variation to the Magistrates Court on appeal: we have been warned by the council that we are likely to lose the case, because it is impossible to prove a problem exists under the four licensing objectives in advance of the club actually opening. This despite overwhelming opposition by local residents and by our political representatives from both parties.

 

3. The need for mandatory licensing reforms

3.1 Clause 25 amends Schedule 3 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982, which is itself adoptive. It is unlikely that all 410 of the licensing authorities operating across England and Wales will adopt the new powers systemically. Many will not anticipate a need for the new powers, having not previously dealt with any lap dancing applications - despite evidence showing that the industry is rapidly spreading countrywide. We have serious concerns about the effect this will have.

 

3.2 Adoptive reforms will give rise to a 'patchwork' of licensing regimes - whereby some local authorities utilise the powers outlined in Clause 25, whilst others continue to rely on the Licensing Act 2003. In the meantime the lap dancing club industry is likely to displace to areas where weaker regulation is in place.

 

3.3 This will leave local authorities exposed to pressure for weaker regulation - as was the case prior to the introduction of the Licensing Act 2003 when operators such as Peter Stringfellow successfully lobbied for the relaxation of 'no nudity' clauses.

 

3.4 Crucially - local residents will face a 'postcode lottery' whereby their concerns (including those relating to gender equality) can be fully taken on board by some licensing authorities, but not by others.

 

3.5 Both these issues run counter to the underlying aim of the reforms - to bolster regulation so that local communities are able to control the proliferation of lap dancing clubs in their area.

 

3.6 I therefore support the amendment tabled by Dr. Roberta Blackman-Woods MP which amends Clause 25 so that licensing reforms are universally applied across England and Wales. This will create a consistent licensing landscape, protect local authorities from exploitation by an industry which is well-known to respond quickly to regulatory changes and ensure local people are empowered in all licensing processes.

 

4. Licensing reforms must apply to all lap dancing activities - regardless of frequency

4.1 Sub-paragraph (b) of page 20, Clause 25 exempts all premises where lap dancing is provided less frequently than once a month.

 

4.2 This will create a significant loophole for the growing number of venues that hold 'lap dancing nights'. It will also reinforce an existing loophole that exists in relation to Temporary Event Notices (TENs) - which are currently used to obtain permission for up to 12 lap dancing/stripping events annually. TENs can only be opposed by a policing authority on the grounds of crime and disorder and local authorities/ residents are unable to object - even on the limited grounds of the Licensing Act 2003. Clause 25 as it stands will allow this loophole to continue.

 

4.3 This is of particular concern given that 'lap dancing/stripping nights' of this kind occur in informal settings not equipped for such activities. Adequate regulation is essential to ensure satisfactory working conditions for performers. It is not logical for extra controls to apply in some situations, but not in others.

4.4 The exemption will also prevent local authorities from fulfilling their obligations under the Gender Equality Duty 2007, by allowing some venues to by-pass the new controls.

 

4.5 I also therefore support the amendment tabled by Lynda Waltho MP which removes this exemption from Clause 25 so that adequate controls apply to all lap dancing activities, regardless of frequency. This is amendment is crucial if local communities are to be fully empowered in the licensing of all lap dancing activities in their area.

 

February 2009