My Lords, I thank the Minister for explaining the purpose and intent of the order, which we shall not be opposing as we accept that there should be arrangements for extending licensing hours
during the World Cup. However, the order raises as many questions as it answers, although in one area it is very explicit. In paragraph 37 of the impact assessment, it says:
“While England are certain to be playing in the matches in the first period, there is a high probability that they will not be playing in the later matches”.
It is good to know what the Government think of England’s prospects.
As the Minister has said, Section 172 of the Licensing Act 2003 confers on the Secretary of State the power to make a national licensing hours order if she considers that a period—I gather it is known as the “celebration period”—marks an occasion of exceptional international, national or local significance. The specified period, which is part or all of the celebration period, cannot exceed four days but means that premises’ licences and club premises’ certifications have effect as if times specified in the order were included in the opening hours authorised by the licence or certificate. The alternative option available would be to use the existing system of temporary event notices, which means that decisions would be made locally and specific conditions could be attached to the granting of any notices to reflect the local situation, or an extension could be refused for specific premises about which there were concerns.
The Government have come to the conclusion that England’s participation in the World Cup this summer, however brief they think it might be, is an occasion of exceptional national significance which justifies the extension of licensing hours to enable fans to watch the matches at pubs and other licensed premises across the country. The other occasions on which the Section 172 power was used were the royal wedding in 2011 and the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee in 2012. The football World Cup is now on a par with those two occasions, as the power has never before been used for a sports tournament. It would be interesting to know whether the Government will also consider the likely participation of the England women’s football team in the World Cup—which I think will be held in Canada next year—as a similar occasion of exceptional national significance.
7.30 pm
The order extends licensing hours with regard to England’s group matches with Italy and Uruguay, since these games will not kick off until the late evening our time due to the time difference between ourselves and Brazil. It will also extend the licensing hours with regard to any matches in the later stages of the World Cup in which England participate—although that will of course be dependent on England still being in the tournament. The Government’s proposal is that for all England matches in the World Cup with a scheduled kick-off time of 8 pm or later, licensing hours should be extended until four hours after kick-off but no later than one in the morning.
Can the Minister confirm that even though we live in a multinational society, this order will not extend to any matches in which England are not participating, and thus would not cover the World Cup final if, for example, Spain played Brazil or another European
country in that final? Can he confirm that any licensed premises that wish to extend their licensing hours for the final in this situation would have to do so through a temporary event notice? If so, what is the Government’s estimate of the likely number of such applications bearing in mind that the impact assessment seems to indicate that the degree of interest in the final would be on a par with any England match, which the Government deem it necessary to deal with by this Section 172 order? Can the Minister say how many licensed premises covered by this order have ever previously applied for a temporary event notice? In other words, will establishments which have never been through the process of meeting the requirements of a temporary event notice be granted an automatic extension to licensing hours under this order?
The government consultation on this issue ran from 13 to 26 March. As the Minister said, the Explanatory Memorandum says that there were just under 1,500 responses to the online consultation. The department also wrote to nine key stakeholders asking for a more detailed response. The Explanatory Memorandum says that those representing licensing authorities and enforcement bodies were not in favour of a national relaxation, while those who represent the licensed trade or football supporters were in favour.
The Explanatory Memorandum is a little thin on the downside of the Government’s proposals. It tells us that the financial benefit to on-trade premises could be £1.35 million, and we also learn from the impact assessment that the preferred option presents the “maximum benefits to business” and that the policy objective is to enable businesses to fully reap the benefits of increased licensable activities during the World Cup. No other considerations seem to get much of a look-in. As far as additional policing costs are concerned, the document tells us that,
“the operational response will vary from force to force and within force, depending on the perception of likely crime and disorder associated with late night opening. We do not know how many more officers police forces would have to roster or for how long, so we are unable to monetise these costs”.
It seems rather odd that it is not possible to provide any figures. Are the police saying that they cannot provide an estimate? Perhaps the Minister can say whether that is the case and whether the Government have asked the police. One would have thought, for example, that a police and crime commissioner might have been interested in additional costs that are likely to be incurred as the result of a government decision, bearing in mind that the additional costs are most likely to be incurred in respect of licensed premises that might have had their applications for extensions declined or conditions attached to them under the existing locally based temporary event notice procedure, but will apparently get the extension automatically under this government order. Who will be responsible for finding the money for any additional policing costs incurred? Will it be the taxpayer, whether national or local?
The Government have decided not to use the existing locally based system of temporary event notices. Does that mean that they do not feel that local licensing hours for England matches at the World Cup is an
issue on which it is appropriate to have local decision-making that takes into account the differing circumstances and views there may be in different areas? The enforcement and licensing authorities may well have very good reasons for feeling that it would not be appropriate for this extension in licensing hours to apply to specific establishments. There may be particular locations where there would be strong objections from local residents. What happens in those circumstances? Does that mean that the licensing hours are extended in respect of specific establishments irrespective of objections, however well founded or legitimate, by the enforcement or licensing authorities or by local residents? If that is the case, how does that decision relate to the Government’s localism agenda?
The Local Government Association said in its response to the Government:
“A blanket extension to opening hours, determined nationally, runs counter to the objectives set out in the Licensing Act 2003 and would remove the ability of councils to take local issues into account when reaching licensing decisions. Further, a one size fits all approach would mean that councils are not able to agree conditions that help to mitigate any potential problems … A blanket extension would make it difficult for the local council and the police to have a definitive picture of which premises intend to remain open for longer, making effective planning much harder”.
The Association of Chief Police Officers said in its response:
“I have no doubt whatsoever that a blanket relaxation of licensing legislation during the period of the 2014 World Cup in Brazil would lead to a rise in public order related incidents and, by extension, increased demand upon the police service. The task of monitoring, predicting and reacting to football related incidents will be made significantly more difficult should the government decide not to require licensed premises to apply for Temporary Event Notices during the World Cup. Without the ability to focus on specific premises, forces would potentially have to over-predict the likelihood of public disorder which, in turn, would result in greater cost to the public purse. The advantage of Temporary Event Notices is that they allow police forces to adapt their public order plans to more accurately reflect the probable demand based upon targeted intelligence”.
We can also look at what the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime had to say in its response to the government consultation:
“MOPAC believes that a local approach to licensing hours during this period would therefore be most appropriate. Leaving licensing decisions to local determination means that any applications for extended opening hours (using the Temporary Event Notice system) can be balanced against local circumstances and any potential adverse impacts on the surrounding community. Local Councils and partners such as the Police understand the nature and operation of establishments in their areas and are best placed to grant or refuse these requests”.
The Government also asked for the views of the National Organisation of Residents Associations, which in its response said that the temporary event notices regime,
“a simple and economic facility for those licensees wishing to extend their licensing hours, gives some influence to the police and environmental health officers to limit and prevent serious problems where they know they might occur. To remove this facility that protects the community and other football supporters is surely unwise. Granting this proposal to relax the licensing hours regulations for the 2014 World Cup matches involving England is highly likely to lead to avoidable serious adverse events affecting residents, who after all comprise the general public”.
I hope that the Minister will respond to the points and questions that I have raised and that he will explain in a bit more detail why the Government
decided not to give greater weight to the views of the police, residents, local authorities and the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime. The argument of the organisations and bodies to which I have just referred is not that no extension of hours should be agreed for England matches but that the decision should be made, as now, locally, rather than by a blanket national order, which does not allow local knowledge, circumstances or objections to be taken into account when making decisions, thus enabling where justified some applications to be rejected and others to have conditions attached to them.