FUTURE CONTROL OF LAP DANCING ESTABLISHMENTS
121. The Government has brought forward clauses in
the Policing and Crime Bill, currently before Parliament, which
would reclassify lap dancing clubs as "sex encounter venues".[177]
If enacted the bill would create a new class of establishment
under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act which
already regulates sex shops and sex cinemas. Local councils would
be able to set limits on how many clubs could be located in a
particular area and would be able to decide to grant no licences
at all. Licences would be renewed on an annual basis. However
it would not be compulsory for councils to move on to this system,
with councils having the discretion to continue to licence lap
dancing clubs under the Licensing Act.
122. The Lap Dancing Association rejects the assertion
that lap dancing clubs and their dancers are part of the sex industry,
instead seeing themselves as "a small but vibrant part of
the UK entertainment industry".[178]
It cites the fact that its members do not condone illegal activity
and states: "our performers are financially independent,
self-employed women. They are not sex workers".[179]
Peter Stringfellow agreed, believing that a move to make lap dancing
clubs sex encounter establishments would be "derogatory"
to those who work in them.[180]
We believe that it would be unfortunate if changes in licensing
of lap dancing establishments gave the public the impression that
such venues offer sex for sale. Such illegal activities are unacceptable
and clubs that condone them should feel the full force of the
law.
123. In reality lap dancing clubs are a hybrid, and
do not fit neatly into either the sex encounter regime or the
licensing regime to which they are currently subject. For this
reason we do not believe that it is appropriate to treat lap dancing
clubs in exactly the same way as sex encounter venues such as
sex shops and sex cinemas. Many of the licensing issues relating
to lap dancing clubs are the same as those found at any late-night
venue: the sale of alcohol, crime and disorder, drunken and anti-social
behaviour. Nevertheless a lap dancing establishment is not the
same as a pub or nightclub, and interested parties with legitimate
concerns should to be able to make representations to the licensing
authorities without having to resort to making spurious objections
on grounds such as the location of a club's toilets.[181]
We therefore recommend that the Government should bring forward
amendments to the Policing and Crime Bill to establish a new class
of venue under Schedule 3 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous
Provisions) Act. Legislation should make it mandatory for councils
to license such establishments under this statutory regime, and
not under the Licensing Act.
124. Most lap dancing establishments are well run
businesses whose owners have in good faith complied with the law
as it stands in order to obtain premises licences for their establishments.
It seems to us unreasonable that lap dancing establishments should
be required to renew their licence on an annual basis, and unlikely
that a club owner would be prepared to make a major capital investment
on such a basis. The annual renewal proposal also removes the
ability to trigger a review of a licence at any time, an important
safeguard for the public and relevant authorities. We recommend
that licences for such venues should be granted for a period of
five years, with the safeguard that any interested party or relevant
authority should be able to request a review of a licence at any
time.
125. Both the timing and the cost involved in moving
the industry to this new licensing regime will be important factors
in its success. The Government has undertaken that lap dancing
establishments will be given a "reasonable period" in
which to apply for a new licence.[182]
We welcome this assurance, and suggest that existing lap dancing
establishments in possession of valid premises' licences should
be given a reasonable transition period in which to complete the
switch over to the new regime, and that fees for doing so should
be limited to cost recovery.
171 
