| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
The Earl of Courtown: Before speaking to the amendments let me say that I believe I have the feeling of the Committee on them at this stage. But I point out that a number of noble Lords on all sides of the Chamber were very concerned when they saw these amendments to the Bill coming forward.
The effect of Amendment No. 1 would be to retain the existing exception from Sunday observance under Section 88 of the Licensing Act 1988 which allows liquor sales at dance events which begin on Saturday night and continue into the early hours of Sunday morning. However, the first part of Clause 1 of the Bill, which is not affected by the amendment, would disapply the whole of the 1780 Act restrictions on music and dancing. Section 88 would therefore no longer be needed. The noble Baroness's amendment would retain a redundant provision and I hope she will, therefore, agree to withdraw it.
As my noble friend Lord Jenkin of Roding explained, his amendment would prohibit the sale of alcohol beyond the normal licensing hours of 10.30 p.m. at commercial dances on Sundays. I understand the concerns of all noble Lords about possible disturbance to residents. However, I should point out that the licensing laws already contain considerable protections for residents against nuisance from late night drinking. It is unfortunate that I did not receive the letter which obviously has been received by many noble Lords on all sides of the Chamber. Extensions cannot run beyond the time which the local authority has laid down for music and dancing to finish. So the local authority does hold the whip hand. If it decides that dancing can run beyond 10.30 p.m., the licensing justices have to consider an application for an extended liquor licence. Extensions are entirely at their discretion and cannot run beyond 2 a.m., or 3 a.m. in parts of London. Moreover, should any problems arise, the courts have the power to revoke the extension.
The Bill would do no more than allow dance organisers to apply to the courts for extended licensing hours on Sundays. The courts would have the same discretion over whether to grant an application, and if so on what terms, as they have for other nights of the week. They would also have the same power to revoke an extension if problems occurred.
In short, the following protections are in place: very wide discretion on initial grant of liquor licences; equally wide discretion on renewal--every three years; and licences can be revoked on application by anyone--police, local authority or individual. There is also wide discretion on grant of special hours certificate, also revokable where noise and nuisance take place; wide discretion on grant of public entertainment licence; and a public entertainment licence has to be renewed every year and can also be revoked where its conditions are broken.
Many noble Lords will know that Sunday already enjoys special considerations under licensing law. For example, the normal licensing hours on Sundays are shorter than on other days of the week. My noble friend Lord Jenkin of Roding mentioned the treatment of applications for Sundays. The Government's understanding, based on counsel's opinion, is that the courts would also be able to take account of the special nature of Sundays when considering applications for extended hours.
The Committee will wish to bear in mind that many dances would not be commercially viable if extended liquor licensing hours were not possible. This would, therefore, be far from a technical amendment; it would seriously weaken the Bill as a whole.
Turning to Amendment No. 3, I understand the intention behind this amendment, which would allow the police and local authorities to protect residents from any disturbance which might arise from the sale and consumption of dance clubs operating late on a Sunday night. However, I do not believe that the amendment is necessary. The courts are already able to limit an extension to the normal licensing hours where disturbance is caused to residents. This can take place
either on the initial grant of the extension or subsequently. Those powers would apply to Sundays as they do to the rest of the week.Local authorities can further influence the length of the extension through limitations on the premises' entertainments licence: as I mentioned earlier, extensions cannot run beyond the time which the local authority has laid down for music and dancing to finish.
The noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, asked about a review of licensing legislation. That review relates entirely to the proposals to extend normal permitted licensing hours on Friday and Saturday nights. Therefore, it does not have any direct relationship with the provisions of the Bill. The noble Baroness also asked me about arrangements for monitoring Sunday dancing. The Home Office will keep the effect of the Bill, if it becomes law, under close review.
The Government will want to ensure that the arrangements work well and provide the necessary protection for residents. That will include the relationships between the liquor and entertainment licensing regimes and the effectiveness of the appeal mechanisms, which will vary from the rest of the week. The prime responsibility for monitoring arrangements locally rests with the local licensing authorities.
My noble friend Lord Jenkin mentioned the representations made by residents. The principle behind liquor and entertainment licensing generally is that there should be maximum freedom for people to spend their leisure time, including freedom to conduct legitimate business, consistent with the avoidance of noise and nuisance to others. It is for the licensing authorities to assess all those factors before deciding whether or not to grant a licence over which they have a wide discretion.
I understand the reasons behind the amendment. However, I hope the noble Baroness will agree that the power to limit the hours during which alcohol may be sold at late night dances is already well provided for by the Bill and that she will therefore agree to withdraw the amendment.
7 p.m.
Viscount Astor: My noble friend the Minister answered on behalf of the Government. Perhaps I may try to address some of the concerns of my noble friend and the noble Baroness on behalf of the promoters of the Bill.
I understand that there are 1,800 night clubs in this country. I am not sure how many are in Scotland and therefore currently open on Sundays but, according to my noble friend Lord Jenkin of Roding, 5 per cent. are in Kensington and Chelsea: that is a large amount.
My noble friend gave some extremely cogent examples as to why licences should not be granted. He gave some good examples of why night clubs disturb residents. I agree with him entirely. But that is not the point. The point the Committee should be addressing is whether the fact that some of those night clubs were opened when perhaps the licensing authorities should reassess the conditions of their opening should prevent other night clubs which wish to open on Sundays, where there are no strenuous objections from residents and
where the licensing authorities and justices recognise that there is a reason for them opening, from applying for a licence.We must remember that, if the Bill becomes law, no late-night clubs will be able automatically to open on Sundays. They will have to go through the licensing system of public entertainment licences and special hours certificates. The question one must ask--raised by the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh of Haringey--is whether the current powers adequately protect the residents. I believe that on the whole they do, though I accept that there may be examples where they do not. I am sure that those licensing authorities will look carefully at that when the licences come up for renewal.
One point made by my noble friend and other Members of the Committee was whether local residents will be satisfactorily protected. How can they successfully fight? How can they hold their corner and show that in some cases certain places should not be open on a Sunday because they are in an area where they may disturb residents? Licensing arrangements are subject to local decisions. The licensing authority, if it wished, could refuse to grant a licence or apply specific rules as to closing time in recognition of the special nature of Sunday.
Perhaps I may offer some optimism to my noble friend. He kindly said that he would not be pressing his Motion this evening but would certainly want to have discussions before Report Stage. Perhaps he will withdraw his Motion so that we can think further on the issues he raised and discuss them with him. There may be a possibility of looking at whether the protection from the possible effects of a Sunday opening are adequate. There may be a way whereby the club could apply for its licence but the burden of proof would lie on the industry to show that there would be no detrimental effects on the local area, as opposed to that burden being on the local residents. That may be an area we can look at between now and Report stage.
Lord Jenkin of Roding: My noble friend has shown that he recognises the strength of feeling expressed both outside the Chamber and in Committee this evening. The suggestions he offered towards the end of his speech are suggestions that will be followed up. He suggested that one protection that might operate is through the moving of the burden of proof. Following the phrase used by my noble friend on the Front Bench, perhaps we can also write into the Bill an obligation that the licensing justices or magistrates, as the case may be, should have regard to the special nature of Sunday evening when considering the extension of a licence into the late hours.
A combination of those two measures of protection would go a long way to meet the case made so powerfully by the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, and others this evening. I shall certainly respond to my noble friend's invitation that we should talk about this matter and do so quickly. But I do so against the background that, if the promoters are not prepared to write into the
Bill something to give the residents protection, then they risk losing Clause 2 altogether. At Report stage I shall not hesitate to divide the Chamber.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |