Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Allen, Peach, Kreling (Sub), Ash, Benton, Swift (Sub) Khan and Shearman (Sub).

Councillor Casey was in attendance as a nominated substitute for Councillor Allen for the duration of the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest.

         The minutes of the meeting held on 16 February 2012 were approved as a true and accurate record.

For the Committee to be provided with an overview of the outcomes of the Licensing Act 2003 Sub-Committee hearings between December 2009 and March 2012 and for those decision notices to be signed off by the Committee as the formal record of the hearings.

         The Licensing Manager presented the Committee with a document containing a summary of the Committee hearings for the Licensing Act 2003 from August 2009 to date.  The document provided the following information:

·         Date of Hearing

·         Name and Address of Premises

·         Type of Application

·         Who Made Representations

·         Reasons

·         Committee Decision

         The Committee were asked to sign off the decision notices for the hearings held between August 2009 to date as a formal record of those hearings.

         Observations and questions were raised and discussed including:

·         Current and new Licensing legislation

·         The Licensing Manager advised Members that representation from the Police had improved and they had attended Licensing Committee hearings much more prepared.

·         Members were informed that Peterborough was currently known as a Relevant Authority which meant that if there was an issue they had to go to a Responsible Authority e.g. Police or Trading Standards to ask them what action they were going to take.  Under the new Act  Peterborough would become a Responsible Authority which would empower them to refuse, remove or review licences without first having to receive a representation from one of the Responsible Authorities.   This would enable the authority to take the necessary actions to tackle irresponsible premises without having to wait for representations from other responsible authorities.

Members asked the following questions:

·         What was the average time from when a complaint was received about licensed premises to it going to Committee?  Members were informed that not all complaints went to Committee as they were often resolved at the point of the issue being identified.  Problems occurred when it was difficult to obtain evidence e.g. noise complaints.  There was no average time.  If a review was requested it could take about six weeks.

·         How many cases had been escalated up to the Magistrates Court?  There were very few as the process was followed very carefully.

·         How many new applications/amendments were received in a year?  Members were informed that between 700 to 800 applications were received in an average year.

·         When licences were revoked were checks carried out to ensure that they had ceased trading?  Members were advised that they were checked and monitored but it was becoming more difficult to monitor as alcohol could now be sold in local food stores or at the back of a shop.

·         How closely do you work with Trading Standards? Members were informed that Trading Standards and Licensing were now co-located in the same department and therefore worked very closely together.

         Members wished to note the excellent work that had been carried out by the Licensing Team.

          RESOLVED:

         The Committee resolved to sign off the decision notices as the formal record of the hearings.