Transcript

Good afternoon, councillors, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to this licensing committee meeting. I'm a councillor Savikianya, chairman of the licensing committee. To my left, to my right, is councillor Paul Gleeson, who will be assisting me in the absence of my chair. Before we move to the preliminaries items of this afternoon's agenda, I need to run through a few housekeeping details. I would like to remind everyone in attendance this afternoon that this meeting is being streamed live on YouTube. Would all persons addressing this meeting please do so through the microphone system at the time this meeting is being recorded. Please ensure that microphones are turned off after speaking. Now we move to part one of the agenda, the preliminaries. Sorry. Are there any apologies? Yes, chairman, we have apologies from councillor Cantwell, Dorian, Drayton, Welbury and Staples. Does any member wish to declare any interest in respect of any item of the agenda? I'm just very quick, I think councillor, this is Austen, go to councillor. I'm just noting councillor Richard Austen's apologies for the meeting as well. Thank you. Do I have permission to sign the minutes of the meeting held on 24th of September 2024? Thank you. Are there any questions from members of public received two clear working days prior to this meeting? Madam Chair, there are none for this meeting. Agenda item one is Licensing Act 2003, draft statement of licensing policy, which starts on page three of the agenda pack. I will ask our senior licensing officer, Anna, to present the report. Thank you, Chair. So this report consists of the proposed revised statement of licensing policy for Boston Borough Council. The policy is being presented to the committee as part of the council's statutory duty to carry out a review of that policy every five years. The policy sets out the approach the council will generally apply when determining applications under the Licensing Act 2003 to ensure that the licensing objectives are suitably promoted and upheld. The licensing objectives under the Act are the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm. The purpose of the policy is to assist applicants in understanding what the authority seeks to achieve and gives advice on measures that applicants can implement to promote those objectives. The policy also serves a purpose as a reference document for all decisions made by the licensing authority. While licensing law is a key element of controlling certain nuisance and antisocial behaviour, the policy makes clear that it should not be used as the primary mechanism for controlling such issues away from the immediate control of the licensed premises. A number of amendments have been made to the existing policy. These are detailed in red ink within the body of the document. Some amendments are non-material, for example, updates on population statistics, license premises numbers, etc. But some amendments have a material effect on the policy. The material amendments are There are additions to Section 4.2 to provide general information and guidance for applicants and license holders on measures they may consider adopting to promote the public safety licensing objective. This includes advice on measures to protect patrons from drink spiking. Reported incidents of drink spiking are on the increase to an extent that the Home Office has published a national strategy on tackling the issue. The policy advises the promotion of staff training, use of door supervisors, awareness of local taxi providers, safe spaces for customers, preventative measures to stop drugs entering the premises, CCTV and consumer materials and products, such as informative posters, anti-spiking bottle tops, etc. to help mitigate related incidents. It also provides advice on measures to be taken when a suspected incident has occurred. For example, recording relevant details, contacting emergency services and securing the offending item so that it can be analysed by the police. In addition to these practices, the revised policy encourages license holders and applicants to promote a number of established schemes to promote public safety. Some of the suggested schemes in the policy are the Ask for Angela scheme. This is a non-profit scheme that helps licensees with the knowledge and tools they need to effectively safeguard customers who feel unsafe or threatened. And when the customer invokes the protections of the scheme by asking for Angela at the bar, the protections include measures such as keeping the customer in a safe place until they can either contact someone for them or arrange for transport to get them home safely. They may also escort them to their vehicle or contact the police. Another scheme is the National Best Bar None scheme. This is an accredited scheme that assesses premises and awards them for their commitment to safety, customer service and responsible alcohol management. A further scheme is the use of the police-backed self-assessment tool, Licensing Security and Vulnerability Initiative. This is known commonly as Licensing Savvy and is designed to help licensed premises provide a safer and more secure environment for their managers, staff, customers and the local communities. The policy also now advises membership on local retailer-led community alcohol partnerships, with the focus being tackling issues of underage drinking within the area. An addition is made to paragraph 4.412, which encourages license holders and applicants to ensure that they and their staff are fully aware of signs of child exploitation and that they should notify relevant authorities if they suspect that such activities are occurring in their premises. A new section has been added relating to safeguarding. This is detailed in paragraphs 32.1 to 32.3 of the policy and offers general advice on promoting the welfare of both children and vulnerable adults when using licensed premises. It recommends that premises carry out risk assessments and ensure their staff have knowledge of signs of abuse and neglect and measures to take when issues are identified. Additionally, the policy lays out the general principles that the licensing authority will apply, where concerns have led to the review of a premises license, regardless of whether or not any convictions have been brought against a license holder relating to safeguarding issues. A new section has been added to address the issue of modern slavery. This is detailed at paragraphs 33.1 to 33.3 and gives general advice on why applicants and license holders should consider the matter, the issues they may face and recommendations for staff training, the implementation of protocols to be activated when issues arise and means of deterring occurrences of exploitation through modern slavery within their premises. A new paragraph has been added to address counter-terrorism. This has been introduced following the Terrorism Protection of Premises Act 2025, gaining royal assent. The legislation, commonly known as Martin's Law, is intended to improve security and organisational preparedness across the UK. The Act will not come into force until 2027, and at this stage, the exact implications for venues is not known. However, certain venues and events will be required to take steps to ensure that they reduce their vulnerability to terror attacks, are prepared for potential attacks and are ready to keep people safe in the event of any such attack. Until further information on the implementation of Martin's Law is known, the policy provides people with links to relevant resources, for example, Protect UK website and app, and it also signposts them to the counter-terrorism annex of the statutory guidance as issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act. A new section and associated appendix has been added to reflect the public status-based protection order that is in force for certain areas of Boston Town Centre. This provides information for applicants and licensees, advising them of the PSPO. The reason it is in force, and gives suggestions on measures they may wish to consider to promote the reduction of street drinking within the PSPO area. Where an applicant is applying for a license in the defined area, the Council expects them to have regard for the order and offer appropriate conditions to mitigate any detrimental impact their business operation may have on the licensing objectives. This includes consideration of appropriate conditions, such as no sales of high-strength lagers or ciders, restricting sales of single cans and bottles, and good practices such as staff training and a robust Challenge 25 scheme. Following the Committee's consideration of the amendments and approval of a draft policy, the authority is duty-bound to carry out consultation. The Act prescribes a number of partners with whom we must consult and a list of those mandatory consultees, plus details of additional consultees is provided at paragraph 2.21 of the report. It is proposed that the consultation will run for an eight-week period, commencing on the 23rd of June. It is a requirement that any responses to the consultation are given appropriate weight when determining the policy. In order to meet this requirement, it is proposed to present a schedule of responses to the Committee in September. The Committee will be able to integrate any amendments into the policy at this stage and approve the final draft policy for referral to Council for adoption. In conclusion, the Council have a statutory duty to review, consult on, adopt, and publish the Statement of Licensing Policy by January 2026. It is recommended that the Committee resolves that the draft policy be consulted on as required under the provisions of the Act and that following that consultation, the Committee will be asked to consider any responses prior to the policy's referral to Council for adoption. Thank you, Chair. That concludes my report. Thank you, Anna. Do I have a proposal? Councillor Baxter? Do I have a seconder? Jonathan? Thank you. Are there any speakers on this item? Councillor Noble? Thank you, Chair. Yes, I originally had one question, but in the light of what Anna was saying, I have a couple more. The first question is this. It refers to page 42 and the Public Space Protection Order. Can you confirm that this is the first two bullet points? No sale of high-strength beers, lagers, and ciders, restricting the sale of single cans. Is this still the case in Boston? These are example conditions. We can't mandate them. So we put this in here as guidance for applicants to consider when they're putting an application in to ensure that they're having consideration of these factors to promote that prevention of crime and disorder licensing objective. We do have a number of premises that have these conditions. They're usually asked for via formal representation from Lincolnshire Police. But the hope is that people will consider this pre-application and put them into their operating schedule as part of their completed application. Right. So to be clear, there's no sanctions that can be applied. They're not absolutely forbidden. Not unless they go to a licensing subcommittee. OK, thank you. Second question, same page. Terrorism and Protection of Premises Act 2025. Do we know why it's called Martin's Law? Who was Martin? Yes, I can tell you. I've actually heard his mother speak at an emergency planning event. Martin was a young man who went to the Ariana Grande concert at Manchester Arena. And he very sadly passed away from his injuries at that terror attack. And his mother has lobbied and petitioned to get this Counter-Terrorism Act brought into force. And it's commonly known as Martin's Law. Thank you. And the last question, please. You mentioned this in your introduction. You refer to population. It's not mentioned in the contents page on page 10. And I'm asking this because I was actually asked this question by a national journalist this morning. What is the current population of Boston? Do you know? It says here, well, the last Office for National Statistics, paragraph 1.1 of the policy was 70,500. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. That's all my questions. Thank you very much. Thank you, Amy. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Anna. That was quite a mouthful, very comprehensive report and lots of red writing. It reminded me of when I was at school. Just a few comments. As I went through, I'd probably miss it. We have to review this every five years. It mentions 2016. But was the last review done in 2021 then? Yeah, that's correct. 2021 was the last review. OK, it's just that I didn't pick that up. As I read through as well and the points you mentioned, I think it's brilliant. It's bringing it up to date as regards spiking. The Angela scheme, public safety, the PSPO and safeguarding. I think that's brilliant. As I went through, though, page 32 mentions about the enforcement policy. I always think, well, people mention to me, when we have a policy, it's OK having the rules and regulations in a policy. But how do we enforce that? So it's quite on page 32, I think it is. It's quite broad, really. Section 36. It just says that enforcement action will be in accordance with the Boston Borough Council's enforcement policy. I just wondered if it might be our idea, if we're consulting on this policy, that we may be circulated that. Just a point. Yeah, I can. I can circulate that through to committee members. I can also, if you would like me to do that, I can put a link in this document. If that corporate enforcement policy is online, I can put a link in here. Just an idea, because as we read things, it's OK having a policy, but then it comes to enforcement. Just thinking as well as I read through this, some of my residents' comments. So, you know, obviously, living in Aldeac and Wrangell, we have parish halls. Above the doors, often there's a sign, licence to do this, this, this. Is that still valid, please? There's no requirement under the Licensing Act for that to be displayed. That was under the previous Justices Act, 1964, I think. If somebody asks me, can it be taken down? Because they still think it's all necessary or whatever, then they can take that down. As far as I'm aware, that's fine. I will just check with Trade and Standards that they don't require it, and I can come back to you. I can check with my colleague at Trade and Standards to clarify that. I've probably raised this before, but, you know, bingo evenings, this is more to do with gambling. Several people say, do you have to have a licence to have a charity-raising bingo session? Would that come within this policy? No, that would fall under our gambling policy. Yeah, I thought it would. And then another thing that people have mentioned, it's quite topical in Boston, is the number of barbers that are sort of like cropping up all over the place. I think I've raised this mainly to do with planning and the signs, but when it comes to barbers, presumably, if there's nothing from central government to say that this is the licence rules for barbers, then we can't apply anything. We can't set anything up locally to say, well, to set up our own licensing conditions. That's correct, yeah. They wouldn't fall under the Licensing Act 2003, because that's very specific alcohol-regulated entertainment. But there's nothing other than planning legislation that you could perhaps use to limit the number of those premises or stop change of use of premises. It's quite topical in many cities and towns, so you've not heard anything on the grapevine that central government are probably bringing anything out or whatever? I haven't, no, nothing at all. OK, thank you. Thanks for your hard work. Thank you. Anyone else? Councillor Woodliffe? Thank you, Chairman. I suppose the only thing is that I would probably go back to the PSPO, isn't it? Which really, we've got inherent weaknesses, doesn't it, really? Because if you look where it is, I'm looking at the map, and I can see a superstore, which is well-known, of course. Of course, it's outside the zone, so of course they can sell anything they want, can't they, really? There's no restrictions on high-strength beers, lugs, and ciders, or single cans, or whatever, is there, really? So there is an inherent weakness in this PSPO. It's, as it designed, perhaps it needs to be reconsidered to include perhaps one or two obvious areas of sale. There's not just the small shops that sell alcohol. Certain large supermarkets sell vast quantities of the stuff. So I think for a PSPO to be effective, it has to extend perhaps a little further out. In short, it picks up the major retailers of alcohol. That's my view, anyway. I'll pass your comments on to the community safety managers. There is. Community safety that maintain and adopt the PSPO. So I'll pass that on to them. I'm not sure how that area is based. I don't know if it's done on crime statistics or hot spots. What I would say, though, is Lincolnshire Police, they like to see those conditions, even if it's a premises outside the PSPO. So it wouldn't be unusual for them to ask for them, regardless of whether a premises falls into that space or not. Yes, OK, fair enough. Thank you. Councillor Mounting. Thank you very much. I echo Councillor Woodliffe's comments, really, on the PSPO, why there's such a large supermarket, which I know for a fact will sell single cans and single bottles because they're doing them in sort of the meal deal type things for evening dinners. My only concern over the public space protection order, it's nice how we've got a lot of information in here and it's updating and it's making licence holders look at it and, you know, seeing what sort of ideas we would like on the licence before they submit it. I get that. I think my only comment off the back of this is whilst we do this work, and again, the report is good and there's a lot of information within there. It's the enforcement of these conditions, which I really can't get my head around because ultimately that will fall under the police or other elements within other councils. And ultimately, they don't have the manpower, apparently, to enforce these. And it's sort of banging your head on the wall. You know, we're putting all of this content in there to try to protect our public spaces, but yet it's not being enforced. Linkershire Police, and I know this through applications where we've had reviews, where they suspect that a problem is a premises is a problem premises, and they have these conditions. They do carry out test purchasing for single cans. We have had it in the past where people have failed that, and then that's led to licence review along with other issues that are there. In respect of the large supermarket, that will be a premises licence that predates the PSPO. So to go back retrospectively and add conditions to that, you would need to have to go through the licence review process. And the police haven't done that because I think it's a case of they don't have an evidential basis of issues that they can link to those premises to go to review on them. Yeah, I agree with your points. You know, again, it's the red tape, and the one thing I hate is red tape. Whilst, yes, the licence was granted previous, obviously if this is the up-to-date licence, surely everybody should operate to this. That's my personal opinion on it, because ultimately what we're doing is that there's, you know, the small businesses, high street corner shops which are trying to make a new living for them, honest tradesmen, I would like to define them as, before anything's proven otherwise, that want to sell within the law, but yet then you've got a big national congomlet that can almost do what they want, because it predates the actual legislation. I agree. It would be down to those larger corporations to take an undertaking themselves to implement those rules, whether that's likely to happen or not. I mean, we could advise, you know, we could engage with them through the Community Alcohol Partnership, see if they're willing to do that, but unfortunately without a review of the licence, we can't impose them at this stage. Thank you for clarity on that. You're welcome. Councillor Noble. Yes, very quickly. One point, carrying on from what Councillor Mountain was just talking about, and I forgot to say at the beginning, I think it was a very well set out report, by the way, very easy to read. The red sections are obviously where the changes are involved, so I thought that was good. Yes, just going from what Councillor Mountain, about testing for underage drinkers, and the police used to send in people who look maybe underage to check if they were selling illegally. Is that still the case of the police to carry out that sort of aspect of enforcement or checking? They do. I don't think it's quite as regularly as it used to be, but they do still do test purchasing. They also do test purchasing for cigarettes and vapes as well, so I think they incorporate it into that, but yes, they certainly do carry out testing. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Now we will move to the vote, if you don't mind. All those in favor? Against? That concludes this afternoon's business, so we'll now close the meeting. Thank you for your attendance. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.