Memorandum submitted by Councillor David Pearson

of Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council

 

I very much welcome the reforms contained in the Policing and Crime Bill regarding Lap Dancing clubs which means they will now be classed as Sex Encounter establishments. However, I am anxious that the subsequent licensing reforms contained in the Policing and Crime Bill will be robust and comprehensive.

 

However, I share the views of The Fawcett Society of which I am a member and Object of which I am a supporter that there are two elements of the PCB which concern me.

 

1. Venues providing lap dancing less than once per month will be exempt from the legislation.

 

2. The legislation is adoptive.

 

The result will be local residents facing a postcode lottery over whether they have a say in lap dancing club licence applications.

 

While London local authorities are clearly leading the way in terms of working to gain greater control over lap-dancing clubs, not all local authorities in England and Wales are similarly concerned and may choose not to adopt the legislation. In which case local people in those areas would continue to be denied a voice, and the licensing regime will end up being unequal.

 

I therefore request that the PCB amend these short-comings and tighten up the legislation.

I would like to see the removal of the exemption which will allow premises holding lap dancing less than once a month to continue doing so with a Premises Licence.

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

 

Otherwise, this will create a significant loophole for the growing number of venues that hold lap top dancing nights. It will also re-enforce an existing loophole that exists in Temporary Event Notices which are currently used to obtain permission for up to 12 dancing/stripping events annually. Temporary Event notices can only be opposed by a policing authority on the grounds of crime or disorder. Clause 25 as it stands will allow this loophole to continue. This is of particular concern given that lap dancing/stripping nights of this kind occur in informal settings not equipped for such activity. 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. The definition of Sex Encounter Venue is founded on the nature of the entertainment provided not how often it takes place.

 

I 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 amendment is crucial if local communities are to be fully empowered in the licensing of lap dancing activities in their area.

 

February 2009