eurealist.co.uk

We were all asked if we wanted to change from the present system to a new system under the control of the local council, to my knowledge no one asked for the change but true to form with this new style of government, we get what they wanted anyway, any colour as long as its black as Mr Ford used to say.
The old system worked very well and it was no small thing having to appear before a magistrate to prove yourself responsible to hold a licence they take their jobs very seriously.

Now with the costs of the EU Asbestos directive the Disabled Act, I as a small restaurateur am being faced with possible bills totalling £5,000 and that is without the cost of removing any asbestos that may be found and the redecoration and the loss of business whilst this work is being carried out. I could also be faced with the cost of knocking down and rebuilding the toilet block because it is too small to allow wheelchair access, installing ramps and as I also let bedrooms, there is the possibility that I will have to install a lift. So before we get all steamed up about new so-called basic rights let us consider the costs involved we might also consider that I now must offer my part-time staff who decide when and if they are going to work on their schedule and not the customers, the same rights as full time staff who are available when the customer are prepared to spend money. The fact that on our day off we must spend half of it filling in forms and keeping Vat accounts for the government, that neither my wife or myself have had a been able to afford a holiday in 10 years consider these things before you decide to work for yourself, oh yes my normal working day is between 13-18 hours.

Telegraph | News | A licence for chaos?: ”

A licence for chaos?
By Joshua Rozenberg, Legal Editor
(Filed: 06/01/2005)

New laws coming into force next month will cut significant amounts of red tape at a stroke, according to the Government.

Oh no, they won’t, says a solicitor specialising in this area. ‘The whole system which has worked so well for so many years is about to disintegrate into chaos - and something must be done before it is too late,’ he warns.

Women drinking in a bar
Small businesses may suffer when the new licensing laws come in

We are talking about the Licensing Act 2003: the legislation that may allow pubs to stay open all night in England and Wales. Under the Act, responsibility for granting licences is transferred from magistrates’ courts to local councils. And one of the prime reasons for this legislation is that it is also supposed to make things simpler.

Rather curiously, licensing is now the responsibility of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. So it fell to Tessa Jowell, the Culture Secretary, to tell local authorities last July that bringing six licensing regimes into one ’should significantly reduce the amount of bureaucracy concerned’.

Even more curiously, it was the Minister for Sport, Richard Caborn, who warned kebab shops, burger bars and hot-dog vans last week that they could be shut down from November if they attract alcohol-fuelled violence and rowdy behaviour after the pubs have shut - not that the pubs will have to shut any more if they can obtain 24-hour licences.

Under the new Act, businesses will be able to apply for a single ‘premises licence’, covering all the licensable activities they wish to carry on. Hearings will be needed only if there are objections, and premises licences will not need regular renewal, as the current liquor licences or public entertainment licences do.

All late–night cafes and take-away shops will need a licence to serve hot food or drink to the public on or from the premises between 11pm and 5am, though there are exemptions for hotels, clubs and vending machines.

Naturally enough, there are transitional provisions allowing businesses with existing licences to apply for them to be converted to new premises licences. That must be done by Aug 7 this year - otherwise, they will have to apply for a completely new licence, risking considerable cost and delay.

But the transitional arrangements are far from simple. Under the existing law, all that a restaurateur has to do is to stand up in court and satisfy the justices that he is fit to hold a liquor licence and that his premises are suitable and safe.

After the Act comes into force, however, he will have to complete a 20-page form, telling the local authority how he proposes to “promote the four licensing objectives”. These are: the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm.

All very worthy, no doubt, but how many operators of small restaurants in Britain have a sufficient command of written English to understand the difference between “disorder” and “nuisance”, let alone to complete the form in any meaningful way?

All existing licence-holders - from “palaces of entertainment” to street-corner convenience stores selling alcohol - will have to submit newly-drawn architectural plans. Under the old system, these were relatively simple and concise, according to Neil Shestopal, a London-based solicitor specialising in licensing law.

Now, plans must show “the location of the extent of the boundary of the building, if relevant, and any external and internal walls which comprise the premises, or in which the premises is comprised”, as well as exits, escape routes, fire extinguishers, the kitchen, and “fixed structures (including furniture) or similar objects temporarily in a fixed location (but not furniture) which may impact on the ability of individuals on the premises to use exits or escape routes without impediment”.

Mr Shestopal fears that the cost of preparing such plans will rarely be below four figures. “I am convinced that this has not been taken into account by the Government in drafting the legislation,” he says. Hence his concern that the system will disintegrate into chaos.

And what of the local authorities that will have to read all these plans and applications? Mr Shestopal says that the council officers he has spoken to are “dreading” the prospect.

Little wonder: the solicitor has also spotted a serious anomaly buried deep within the legislation. Under paragraph 6(5) of Schedule 8, a premises licence cannot be obtained under the transitional provisions unless the premises are to be used for the “existing licensable activities”. But you don’t need a licence at present to serve food after 11pm, provided you already have a licence to serve alcohol.

That means that if you want to carry on serving food from 11pm onwards, you will need a new licence from November - for which you must comply with regulations covering objections, advertisements, service of notices and so on.

So, whose job is it to spot apparent anomalies? Primary responsibility clearly rests with the Secretary of State and her officials, who draft “instructions” and set out the policy objectives that they hope to achieve through legislation. Those instructions are sent to Parliamentary Counsel, a team of highly specialised lawyers based in Whitehall. But it is not the drafter’s job to decide what a Bill should do, according to Sir Geoffrey Bowman, the First Parliamentary Counsel.

“We do not make up policy; we clarify it,” he told me in an interview for Radio 4’s Today programme last week.

Sir Geoffrey accepts that there is an inherent tension in the process of producing Parliamentary Bills.

The pressures are worse than when he first became a Parliamentary draftsman 30 years ago, he added.

But he saw encouraging signs: for example, more use of pre-legislative scrutiny, explanatory notes on legislation and simpler drafting techniques.

That, however, will provide little comfort for restaurant owners now facing an impossible choice: should they spend a fortune in legal fees - or persuade after-theatre customers wanting a pudding to drink a pudding wine instead?”