Issue - meetings

Sandy Kelman asked the Board if they had any comments on how the Policy operated in practice.  The Convener commented that the Board had identified that there was overprovision of off-sale premises in the Board’s area with the exception of two localities.  Councillor Lawrence considered that the main benefit of the over provision policy was that it raised awareness of the health objective.  He commented that every application was considered by the Board on its individual merits and applicants seeking new premises licences offering off-sales required to put forward their case to justify an exception to the policy.

The Convener added that the information presented by the Health Board was now much more specific and the Board was receiving area and postcode specific information which aided the  Board in its decision making process.

The Convener considered that the biggest challenge for the Board has been existing off-sale premises seeking increases to their capacity and relating that to the issue of overprovision.  In such cases the Board has to carefully consider the individual circumstances of each application and the terms of its policy and whether to deviate from it. 

Sandy Kelman asked whether the Board would consider providing a list of   circumstances where the Board would deviate from the terms of their policy. 

Mrs O’Hare considered that the Board would not wish to overly restrict itself in its decision making.  The Convener commented that the Board needed to have flexibility in its decision making but that officers could look at other Board’s Policies for guidance on the issue.

The Joint Meeting resolved:-

to note the position. 

The Convener asked the Board if they had any comments on how the Policy operated in practice.  Councillor Boulton advised that she found it frustrating when applications which seemed on the surface to be straightforward approvals or refusals then became complicated.  She advised that the Board would always go to the Policy as their starting point for any decisions.  Further training was to be given to members of the Licensing Board in September / October.

Councillor Boulton referred to the objections made to applications by the Police and the NHS, and suggested that the Board would find it particularly helpful if the submissions contained more area-specific information – for example, the number of incidents in that area, or the number of admissions to Accident and Emergency which were alcohol related.  The Convener added that although the submissions could include more local information, evidence showed that people would often travel several miles to purchase alcohol, for example, at a supermarket, so this would also need to be taken into consideration.  Shamini Omnes advised that the NHS was starting to work with local communities to discuss where alcohol purchases were being made.  Councillor Carle agreed that the Board needed to receive localised data which would back up the Policy and link to the Licensing Objectives.

Ruary Campbell suggested that the data should already have been used to determine where there was over-provision.  Councillor Boulton explained that the current classification of areas of over-provision had occurred following the experiences of the previous Licensing Board.  If, for example, only the city centre was classed as an area of over-provision, the problem would simply be displaced elsewhere.  Mr Anderson advised that the Policy was not set in stone, and there could be exceptions and occasions to look at specific evidence.  The additional data being requested could then be used in cases where exceptional circumstances were being cited.

Inspector Hume highlighted perceived anomalies in the Board’s decisions, stating that two premises in the same street had applied for a licence and one had been granted, while the other had not due to over-provision.  He added that the statement of reasons was unclear as to why this had occurred.  He advised that the Police had the capacity to break down the number of crimes in a particular area which were alcohol related, however there was a risk that perhaps only one or two premises were affecting the statistics in that area, rather than off-sales.  He also asked how ‘locality’ would be defined – for example, if the locality was defined as the city centre, it would be very unlikely for anyone to be granted a licence based on statistics.  Where there were incidents, the alcohol might not have been sourced in that area, and Inspector Hume highlighted the issue of ‘pre-loading’, where people would drink at home prior to going out for the evening.  He added that the Licensing Board would require to give clear direction on the information they required for a particular area.  Councillor Boulton  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5