Annex
EXAMPLES OF INCONSISTENT OR POOR REGULATION
DIFFERENT ENFORCEMENT
PRACTICES MAKE
IT HARD
TO PROVIDE
UNIFORM TRAINING
PROGRAMMES
Some local authorities use forged
ID during test purchase operations and use volunteers over the
recommended guidance age. This is designed to catch out retailers
rather than to validate high quality training programmes.
Constant test purchasingsome
Local Authorities will test a store constantly until they find
an illegal sale when they will then review the licence. This approach
fails to take into account any risk based assessment and does
not tackle the demand side. It also risks turning a decent, hard
working check out assistant who has made a mistake into a sacked
worker who has a criminal record.
PROCESSING OF
APPLICATIONS
Some local authorities require conditions
to be placed on licences, sometimes without prior discussion or
consultation, to meet perceived local problems or concerns, as
opposed to issues which directly relate to the premises which
are the subject of the application.
Some authorities are simply not aware
of what documentation is required. Stores are therefore often
unnecessarily asked to produce and copy documents which aren't
needed for consideration of applications for variations of licences.
There is considerable inconsistency
in the processing of new personal license applications. Delivery
ranges from a couple of days to months for the council to respond.
Minor variations have been the subject
of a recent consultative proposal from DCMS. At the moment, there
is considerable inconsistency between local authorities as to
what they consider to be minor and how they handle the process.
When hearings are required, some
authorities provide notice for applicants to attend whilst others
refuse to acknowledge that the applicant has any rights to be
at their own hearing. Submissions are sometimes required well
in advance of a hearing and sometimes not.
PERVERSE CONDITIONS
We have seen Local Authorities require
all beer or cider over 5.5% to be removed from shelves. This restriction
has no evidence base and includes all the fine quality varietal
ciders and beers on offer to the discerning drinker.
Some local authorities require impossible
training demands such as requiring all the staff in a supermarket
to complete a BII qualification examination.
Some local authorities are asking
stores to mark their bottles and cans. Again there is no indication
that they have considered the cost to companies and examined how
this will help prevent under age drinking.
Stores are asked to enter into voluntary
agreements with each other and with the police/local authority
not to sell alcohol to those under 21. We have strong legal advice
that companies cannot enter into this kind of agreement because
of competition law.
Some local authorities have sought
to impose conditions on retailers to restrict price-promotion
activity which is also likely to put those retailers in breach
of competition law if they agree to the condition.
October 2008
|