Licensing Act 2003 (FIFA World Cup Licensing Hours) Order 2014

Monday 12th May 2014 Lords Chamber

Motion to Approve

19:21

Moved by

[Lord Taylor of Holbeach]

To move that the draft Order laid before the House on 1 April be approved.

Relevant document: 26th Report from the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord Taylor of Holbeach) (Con)]

My Lords, this order makes provision for the relaxation of licensing hours in England during World Cup matches in which England is playing. The 2014 World Cup will be hosted by Brazil, and the difference between the respective time zones means that several matches will kick off late in the evening and finish after the traditional closing time of 11 pm. The purpose of the licensing hours order is to allow people to enjoy the matches while minimising the administrative burden on licensing authorities and licensed premises, which would otherwise need to provide notice that they intended to extend their hours.

Section 172 of the Licensing Act 2003 allows the Secretary of State to make an order relaxing opening hours for licensed premises to mark occasions of,

“exceptional international, national or local significance”.

The coalition Government consider that England playing in the World Cup is an event of exceptional national significance, which many people will want to celebrate together.

We consulted in March on whether to relax licensing hours nationally. We received nearly 1,500 responses to our online consultation: 500 of those were from members of the public and 75% of all responses were in favour of the national relaxation. In addition, we consulted key strategic partners who represent a range of views, including the police, licensing authorities, the licensed trade, residents’ associations and health bodies. Some of these stakeholders raised concerns about late-night drinking leading to crime, disorder and public nuisance. We have sought to strike a balance by limiting the periods when licensing hours will be relaxed.

We believe that the vast majority of people will enjoy watching matches responsibly. The British Beer and Pub Association, in partnership with the Local Government Association and the Association of Chief Police Officers, has published guidance for licensed premises which intend to show the World Cup matches. The guidance aims to encourage the licensed trade to work together with the police and licensing authorities to ensure the safety of the public.

The order would apply to all licensed premises in England. It will cover the sale of alcohol and late-night refreshment for consumption on the premises during those matches in which England is playing. It will apply for a maximum of four hours for matches with a scheduled kick-off time of 8 pm or later, to a latest time of 1 am.

The order will apply to England only. We consulted on whether the order should have effect in England and Wales, or England only. We received only 25 responses from people who live or work in Wales, just over 2% of the total received. While Welsh respondents wanted licensing hours to be relaxed during the World Cup, the majority favoured it being done using the existing system of temporary event notices, rather than a blanket relaxation. This is consistent with what the Government have done: a national blanket relaxation in England, with licensed premises able to use the temporary event notices in Wales.

The Government have sought the views of those who would be affected by a relaxation in licensing hours. We have carefully considered their responses, including concerns about increased crime, disorder and public nuisance, and balanced this with reducing the burden on businesses which would otherwise need to use a temporary event notice to extend their opening hours. We have limited the relaxation to a maximum of four hours after the scheduled kick-off time, to a latest time of 1 am. This is a modest relaxation in licensing hours to allow those who wish to celebrate the occasion to do so.

I hope that noble Lords will agree with the Government that the licensing hours order is an appropriate use of the powers conferred on the Home Secretary by the Licensing Act. With that, I commend the order to the House.

[Lord Addington (LD)]

My Lords, briefly, this order that we extend licensing hours is an appropriate response to the celebration of a major national occasion. However, I would like to ask the Government a couple of other questions. The unfortunate fact is that things such as domestic abuse tend to go up when alcohol is consumed around sporting events. I was recently made aware of the White Ribbon Campaign, which tries to deal with other sporting groups, making sure that they are aware that this goes on and is unacceptable.

Will the Government be doing something to make sure that people such as, for instance, the football authorities—those who profit from this—accept that this type of behaviour is as unacceptable after the event as anything that would go on at the event, effectively making people aware that if you have had a few drinks and a great night out, you should not take out any frustrations on the person at home when you get back? It would be a good idea if that responsibility was passed on to all those who profit from this. Most people do not indulge in this; it is not a compulsory element, so a ban is not appropriate. Those who profit from this should be making sure that those who might use this as cover for anti-social behaviour, particularly in the privacy of a home, are aware that it is not acceptable.

I hope that the Government have a reasonably positive attitude towards this, if only as something that will develop out of this in the future. We must be aware that celebrations can mask anti-social activity.

[Lord Rosser (Lab)]

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.

19:30

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.

[Lord Taylor of Holbeach]

My Lords, I welcome the debate on this order. I am not entirely sure where the noble Lord, Lord Rosser, stands on the issue before us—

[Lord Rosser]

I thought that I made that clear when I started. I said that we were not opposing it as we accepted that there was a need to provide arrangements for extended hours during the World Cup. What I am raising with the Government is how views were sought from a number of stakeholders, to which I have referred. They covered the police and the Mayor’s office, as well as local government and residents, who were not saying that there should not be an extension but asked why we could not stick with the current procedure of temporary event notices, which allow local circumstances to be taken into account, rather than doing it on a blanket basis, which, unless the Minister is going to tell me to the contrary, does not allow local circumstances to be taken into account.

[Lord Taylor of Holbeach]

It was that point of which I was uncertain—as to whether the Opposition were in favour of doing it through this measure. I am still unsure. I understand exactly what he has said—

[Lord Rosser]

I am asking the Minister to explain in rather more detail why, in the face of those points made by the organisations to which I referred, the Government are saying that the best approach is the national blanket decision rather than a continuation of temporary event orders. We are not opposing this order as we recognise that there has to be a facility for extension of licensing hours. But we are curious as to why the Government are so keen to go down the road of the national blanket order, which does not allow local circumstances to be taken into account, bearing in mind the nature of the comments that came back from the police and the Mayor’s office, residents’ organisations and the Local Government Association.

[Lord Taylor of Holbeach]

Of course, the overwhelming number of comments were in favour of using this measure. I accept what the noble Lord says. He is quite right to challenge the Government on why they have made this decision. I think that England’s participation in the World Cup is an occasion that many people will want to enjoy in an atmosphere of clubs or bars where they will be enjoying themselves with other people. We consider it appropriate that the World Cup is seen as an event of exceptional national significance for the purposes of Section 172 of the Licensing Act.

Before I go on to the points raised by the noble Lord, Lord Rosser, I would like to respond to my noble friend Lord Addington, who mentioned the very serious consideration of domestic violence. It is interesting that we have a domestic violence debate tomorrow, which I am also involved in. In truth, there is very little recent evidence that shows that incidents of domestic violence increase during sporting events, although in the past there have been occasions when such phenomena have been reported. Women’s Aid will run a campaign to raise awareness about domestic violence during the period of the World Cup, and that campaign is supported by the Home Office.

The noble Lord, Lord Rosser, asked whether we are going to extend the blanket provision to matches when England is not playing, such as the World Cup final. It is acknowledged that an awful lot of people will probably watch those games, but the power under which this order is being made allows for the relaxation for events of exceptional national significance and we consider that this would not meet the criteria if England was not playing in the final.

On that basis, the noble Lord has clearly read with interest the impact assessment. I am pleased that he is impressed by the intellectual rigour with which the Government draw up those assessments. He is quite right. It says that England are certain to play in the matches of the first period of the tournament—I think that we can all agree on that—but that there is a high probability that England will not play in later matches. That is a matter of opinion, and I am sure that other noble Lords will have different views on that issue. But the use of Betfair and its interactive website was the basis for that assessment.

19:45

[Lord Rosser]

As I understand it, the Minister has said that a blanket order could not apply to the final if England was not participating in it. Am I not right in saying that Section 172 can be applied to mark occasions of exceptional international significance as well as national significance?

[Lord Taylor of Holbeach]

The noble Lord is absolutely right, but the Government have not taken the view that that particular definition applies in this instance. We are limiting it to those games in which England is playing.

The noble Lord, Lord Rosser, asked about additional policing costs, crime and disorder and the cost to the taxpayer. We are mindful that late-night drinking can lead to crime and disorder as well as public nuisance but, because these matches will be identified and the situations known, the order is restricted to the sale of alcohol and late-night refreshment in pubs, clubs and anywhere else where alcohol is consumed on the premises. It is not an off-the-premises order.

The noble Lord asked about giving the police extra funding for this. No, this is not an event for which extra funding would be provided. He also asked whether there would be other occasions on which football events would be covered, and mentioned the women’s World Cup. Each occasion is assessed on a case-by-case basis, based on whether they could be considered of significance, alongside other circumstances, such as time, location, and the impact on public safety. Those things are carefully considered before orders such as this one are brought before the House.

The noble Lord asked how it would be possible to plan policing. The police will use their relationship with premises to determine which premises would be extending their licensing hours and will manage risks accordingly. He asked how we squared this proposal with our localism approach. The Government have decided that England’s participation in the World Cup is an exceptional national event. Due to the late kick-off times, which we cannot help, since Brazil is west of here, it is appropriate to relax licensing hours for a modest length of time in relation to these matters. This order provides a temporary change only in licensing hours during World Cup 2014.

Licensing hours have been relaxed before, as I have said. The order provides a temporary change, specifically for England’s matches. Future events and occasions will be considered on a case-by-case basis. This licensing hours order will reduce the burden on businesses, which is why we have chosen this path, when otherwise they would need to use temporary event notices to extend their opening hours. It will reduce the burden on licensing authorities, which would have to process the notices.

[Lord Rosser]

I am still not clear on the question of additional policing costs. Can the Minister say that the additional policing costs will be less than what the Government described as the benefit to on-trade premises of £1.35 million?

[Lord Taylor of Holbeach]

My Lords, I cannot say categorically what the actual increase in costs will be and I certainly cannot state categorically the degree to which the order will increase police costs. I think that a far more difficult situation would arise if England were playing, clubs, pubs and bars were not open and there was informal activity on private premises. At least the order allows policing to be planned as it enables the police to know which licensed premises will be open during these events.

[Lord Addington]

Before my noble friend sits down, I hope that I can ask him one more question. I asked whether those who will profit from the World Cup will be given a little more encouragement to make sure that domestic abuse issues are brought to the public’s attention. As the audience we are talking about is predominantly male and the problem to which I referred is predominantly a male problem, this might be a good time to raise awareness of it and establish an ongoing duty in this regard. That was what I was trying to get at. I did not get a chance to speak to my noble friend about this issue before the debate as he has been so busy but I wonder whether he could give his thoughts on that issue.

[Lord Taylor of Holbeach]

I certainly understand exactly what my noble friend is saying. As I said, the Home Office is supporting an awareness campaign on this issue. I cannot give him a specific promise that there will be a continuing commitment in this regard. However, we will discuss this issue tomorrow afternoon and I hope that the noble Lord will participate in that debate. I am prepared to write to him about a continuing commitment if that would be helpful in the event that he is not able to attend tomorrow’s debate.

[Lord Rosser]

I wish to ask the Minister a question following what he said a moment ago—that premises which decide to stay open later under the blanket order will have to advise the police in advance of their decision to do so. I thought the Minister was arguing that the blanket order made it easier for the police to keep control of the situation. However, the letter from the Association of Chief Police Officers says that 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”.

Does it mean, therefore, that under this blanket order premises which are intending to stay open later within the terms of the order will have to advise the police in advance?

[Lord Taylor of Holbeach]

No, that is not the case. However, the police will be able to ask whether such places intend to remain open. That is entirely up to them.

[Lord Rosser]

Can we be clear, therefore, that under the blanket order the police have to ask premises whether they are staying open whereas under the temporary event notice, where people would have to apply, the police would know in advance who would be staying open?

[Lord Taylor of Holbeach]

If the police consider it is important for them to know that information, they will ask the question. If they do not think it is important to know that, they do not have to ask the question; it is entirely up to them. It is a policing matter, not a question of the licensing arrangements. We are making it clear that the whole point of this measure is to liberalise the licensing hours available to licensed bars and pubs to enable them to have extra licensing hours, if that is what they seek, to enable their customers to watch matches and have a drink at the same time. I think it is quite clear what the arrangements will be. I would have thought that the noble Lord would accept that it is a perfectly sensible and practical arrangement. As I said in my opening speech—

[Lord Rosser]

The Minister says he hoped that I would accept that this is a perfectly practical arrangement. I have made it clear that there is no argument about the need for a procedure for extended hours. However, the points I am raising are ones the police have raised.

[Lord Taylor of Holbeach]

I think I have given the answer, have I not? My job is to present the reasons why we have chosen to go ahead with the order. We have done so because we consider that this is an event of national significance. As it is an event of national significance, we have decided that the Licensing Act approach is the right one to take to provide the opportunity for licensed premises to stay open during the matches. We have made it quite clear why we have done that. The job of the police is to maintain order. They are entitled to say that they do not particularly like our approach; that is entirely up to them. However, the Government have made this decision because they think it is in the interests of the public as a whole that they have an opportunity to view the matches while attending licensed premises. I think that is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. The order is conditional on England playing in any particular match. The coalition Government believe that the decision to relax licensing hours for England matches during the World Cup strikes the right balance between recognising the benefits of alcohol when it is enjoyed responsibly and maintaining proper safeguards for the public. On that basis, I hope that these orders are agreed.

Motion agreed.