Agenda and minutes

Apologies of absence were received from Councillors David Fuller, Eleanor Scott and Phil Smith.  Councillor Peter Eddis was present as substitute.

Councillors Margaret Foster and Jason Fazackarley declared a personal interest in agenda item 8 - Licensing Act 2003 - Application for the withdrawal of Club Premises Licence - Big Slick, 240 Fratton Road, Portsmouth - in that they both know the owner of the premises. They agreed to leave the room during discussion of this item.

The minutes of the meeting held on 21 January 2013 are attached.

RECOMMENDED that the minutes of the Licensing Policy Committee meeting held on 21 January 2013 be agreed and signed by the chair as a correct record.

(TAKE IN MINUTES)

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Licensing Policy Committee meeting held on 21 January 2013 be agreed and signed by the chair as a correct record.

The minutes of the meetings held on October 3, 10 & 17, November 21, December 12 & 19 2012, and January 9 & 25 2013, February 6, March 6, April 24, May 14, June 4 & 14 and July 23 & 31 2013 are available to view on the council website and can be accessed via the link below:

http://www.portsmouth.gov.uk/yourcouncil/8249.html

RECOMMENDED that the minutes of the Licensing Sub Committee meetings held on October 3, 10 & 17, November 21, December 12 & 19 2012, and January 9 & 25 2013, February 6, March 6, April 24, May 14, June 4 & 14 and July 23 & 31 2013 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the relevant chair.

(TAKE IN MINUTES)

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Licensing Sub Committee meetings as listed above be agreed and signed by the chair as appropriate, as a correct record of that meeting.

Sex Establishment Licensing - Considerations and Adoption of Standard Conditions

Purpose

The purpose of the report is for the Licensing Committee to consider and adopt the proposed standard conditions application to all classes of sex establishments, including minimum standards relating to the formulation of Codes of Conduct for dancers and customers in respect of sexual entertainment venues.

RECOMMENDED:-

a)   That the Licensing Committee approve and adopt the standard conditions as set out in Appendix B of this report;

b)   That the Licensing Committee rescind the existing conditions applicable to sex establishments as sent out in Appendix A; and

c)   That the Licensing Committee delegates authority to the Head of Health, Safety and Licensing to substitute, delete, vary or amend such conditions at any time.

A report by the Licensing Manager is attached

Members confirmed that they had read the written deputations from Sarah Bland, Portsmouth resident, Chair of Solent Feminist Network that had been circulated to members prior to the meeting.

Mr Ojla, owner of Wiggle and Elegance and John Fernandez, manager of Wiggle asked the committee to note the following comments:

·                     97% of respondents to a consultation two years ago were in favour of keeping the establishments open.

·                     Of all the night time economy businesses in the area, the police reported that these types of establishments caused the fewest problems.

·                     Crime in the area was reduced because of the CCTV around Wiggle. 

·                     Clients appreciate the venues because they are quieter than pubs and more upmarket.  They can enjoy a chilled out evening in the company of pretty girls.

They outlined their concerns with some of the proposed conditions that were set out in appendix B of the report:

50 Members were asked to compare flyers which were circulated to the committee from Elegance and those promoting entertainment nights in pubs and clubs in the area.  The latter showed photos of scantily clad women whilst the former was a silhouette of a woman pole dancing. 

42 If they were prohibited from displaying their logo it would be difficult for customers to differentiate between them and other venues.

43  It would not be practical to come to the licensing committee for approval of every external display or advertising material before these are used.

Paul Ojla, OJs Group asked members to consider his comments on the following proposed conditions:

7    It would be difficult to define what is meant by the term vicinity in this context.  He asked if the 'touting or soliciting custom' referred to handing out flyers.  Promotion is very important to a business.

17  This condition is not required.

31  If the conditions can be amended at any time by the council, what is the point of this meeting?

42   The logo of Wiggle (a silhouette of a woman pole dancing) is not seedy so there is no need for this condition.

50   Prohibiting flyers and similar promotional material would put this business at an unfair disadvantage with regard to other venues.  

Councillor Adair thanked the licensees for keeping the promise made at the previous licensing policy meeting to paint the front of the building located in Granada Road. 

In response to the points raised and further questions from the committee, the Licensing Manager made the following points:

·                     Venues with licences to provide sexual entertainment are subject to much stricter regulatory regime than those with alcohol licences.

·                     Condition 6 has been in place since 1982 when the controls of SEVs were first established.  It is not appropriate to have SEV staff touting for business on the public highway.  

·                     The SEV policy is currently based on the assumption that there will be no SEVs in Portsmouth with the exception of existing premises.  However, licences could be transferred to new operators.

·                     The details of the licence for SEVs have not yet  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to inform members of the introduction of a new licensing regime for the control of scrap metal dealers and motor salvage operators under the Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013 ("The Act").  This new legislation replaces previous simple registration requirements for scrap metal dealers and motor salvage operators.

This report has been prepared for Licensing Committee, Cabinet and Council for consideration and approval of delegations as, due to legal difficulties in the implementation by central government, tight timescales have been set and until such time as changes are made to the Local Authorities (Functions and Responsibilities) Regulations 2000, this licensing function has yet to be deemed to be a function which is not the responsibility of an authority's executive.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Licensing Committee:

(i)           That the contents of the report are noted:

(ii)          That the Licensing Committee recommends to Cabinet to delegate to the Head of Health, Safety and Licensing:

·         The administration and enforcement of the function including the setting of fees;

·         The power to request further information of applicants (schedule 1, paragraph 4 of the Act);

·         To determine applications (including refusal), revoke licenses or to impose conditions under section 3(9) of the Act;

·         The power to issue or cancel a closure notice for unlicensed sites, and, where appropriate, to apple for closure orders (schedule 2 of the Act) and take such other action in this respect as may be required.

(iii)         That the Licensing Committee recommends to Council to delegate the function to the Licensing Committee as and when the power to do so comes into effect in accordance with The Local Authorities (Functions and Responsibilities) (England) Regulations.

A report by the Licensing Manager is attached.

The Licensing Manager introduced her report and in response to questions from members, clarified the following points:

·                     Many applications have already been received.

·                     Mobile collectors will be required to display a licence disc, similar to taxis.

·                     Hampshire Police leads on enforcement of scrap metal legislation.

·                     The Act sets out the checks the site trader must carry out when accepting metal.

·                     Mobile collectors require permits for each area in which they operate.

·                     Dealers could not have a site and a mobile licence in the same licensing area but could have a site licence with one authority and a mobile collectors licence with another.

·                     House clearers may not in certain circumstances require a licence if collection of scrap metal is not their primary business but each case will be judged on its own merits.

·                     Staff will be trained on their new powers to enter and inspect sites and will use a risk-based approach to visits.

·                     Licensing Authorities are bound by the Local Government Agency's recommendations that arose from the Hemming v Westminster case: councils should ensure that the fees do not reflect costs of addressing unlicensed business activity; are based on costs and are transparent.

·                     The committee could ask for a report in six months' time to assess officer time spent on this.

Councillor Les Stevens informed the committee that when a householder gives their scrap metal to a collector, they must check that it is disposed of appropriately.  If it is dumped, the householder could be fined as well as the collector.

Members expressed concern that the fees are not sufficient to cover the costs of inspecting all scrap metal sites.  These would include administration, travel time and a minimum of half hour visits to each scrap metal site every quarter.

The Assistant City Solicitor reminded the committee that the fees must be reasonable and proportional and based on evidence.  The proposed fees are in line with other local authorities' fees.  If the fees were raised without a breakdown of costs, the council would be exposed to challenge.

Councillor Ellcome noted that companies must be treated equally.

Councillor Lee Mason expressed concern regarding delegating powers to an officer. 

Councillor Les Stevens informed members that he would be prepared to make a deputation to the Cabinet to raise their concerns.

RESOLVED that:

1.            The contents of the report be noted.

2.            The Licensing Committee recommended that the Cabinet delegate to the Head of Health, Safety and Licensing:

·                     The administration and enforcement of the function including the setting of fees.

·                     The power to request further information of applicants (schedule 1, paragraph 4 of the Act).

·                     To determine applications (including refusal), revoke licences or to impose conditions under section 3(8) of the Act.

·                     The power to issue or cancel a closure notice for unlicensed sites, and, where appropriate, to apply for closure orders (schedule 2 of the Act) and take such other action in this respect as may be required.

3.            The Licensing Committee recommended that Council delegate the function to the Licensing Committee  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

Purpose

The purpose of this report is for the Licensing Committee to consider a proposal to extend powers of delegation to the Head of Health, Safety and Licensing so as to permit the giving of notice under section 90 of the Licensing Act 2003 ("The Act") to withdraw a Club Premises Certificate ("CPC") where a club ceases to satisfy the conditions required to be a qualifying Club in relation to a qualifying club activity.

RECOMMENDED:

a)   That the Licensing Committee note the contents of the report;

b)   That the Licensing Committee delegates responsibility to the Head of Health, Safety and Licensing to give notice under Section 90 of the Licensing Act 2003 to withdraw a Club Premises Certificate where it appears that a Club ceases to satisfy the conditions required to be a qualifying Club in relation to a qualifying club activity.

A report by the Licensing Manager is attached.

RESOLVED that:

1. The Licensing Committee noted the contents of the report.

2. Responsibility to give notice under Section 90 of the Licensing Act 2003 to withdraw a Club Premises Certificate where it appears that a Club ceases to satisfy the conditions required to be a qualifying club in relation to a qualifying club activity remains a non-delegated function and will be determined by the Licensing Committee.

Purpose

The purpose of this report is for the Licensing Committee to consider the withdrawal of the Club Premises Certificate in respect of the premises known as the Big Slick and situated at 240 Fratton Road, Portsmouth, PO1 5HH.

RECCOMMENDED:

a)    That the Licensing Committee note the contents of the report;

b)   That the Licensing Committee give notice to the Secretary of Big Slick Club Premises of the withdrawal of the club premises certificate as it appears to the Licensing Authority that the club does not satisfy the conditions for being a "qualifying club" in relation to a qualifying club activity to which the certificate relates (section 61 of the Licensing Act 2003), namely that the club is unable to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Licensing Authority that it is being run in good faith in that it has failed to provide sufficient evidence that the general conditions are being met and there are a number of concerns regarding the membership, finances and its overall purpose.

A report by the Licensing Manager is attached.

The Licensing Manager presented the report and in response to questions from the committee, clarified the following points:

This came to the council's attention, following correspondence with the Gambling Commission which raised concerns about illegal gambling.   Upon investigation, it became evident that the club was not being properly run. 

If the certificate were withdrawn, the applicant would not be able to operate whilst waiting for appeal to be held.

Information was requested from the club to establish whether the club was being operated in good faith. Audited accounts, membership details.  These were not provided.  The Act says that if you can't be satisfied that it is run in accordance with the conditions the Licensing Authority must withdraw the club premises certificate.

The club must be established for purposes other than gambling but the webpage predominantly advertises the gambling facilities

Councillor Lee Mason refrained from voting on this item because he had been absent for part of the discussion.

RESOLVED that:

1. The contents of the report be noted.

2. Notice be given to the Secretary of Big Slick Club Premises of the withdrawal of the club premises certificate as it appears to the Licensing Authority that the club does not satisfy the conditions for being a 'qualifying club' in relation to a qualifying club activity to which the certificate relates (section 61 of the Licensing Act 2003), namely that the club is unable to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Licensing Committee that it's being run in good faith in that it has failed to provide sufficient evidence that the general conditions are being met and there are a number of concerns regarding the membership, finances and its overall purpose.