   |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Licensing (Scotland) Bill - Frequently Asked Questions About the Scottish Beer and Pub Association (SBPA) The Scottish Beer and Pub Association was originally formed in 1906. Its members are Scotland's brewing and large pub companies representing the licensed trade industry in Scotland. The main aim of the Association is to contribute to the economic and social wellbeing of Scotland through employment, investment and training. The Scottish Beer and Pub Association's members include Scottish Brewers Ltd, Tennent Caledonian Breweries Ltd, Carlsberg U.K. (Scotland) Ltd, Belhaven Group plc, The Caledonian Brewing Company, Diageo Ltd, Broughton Ales, Scottish and Newcastle Pub Enterprises, The Spirit Group, Mitchells and Butlers, Enterprise Inns, Punch Taverns & Maclay Group. Our parent association is the British Beer and Pub Association (BBPA). Our members account for 1,500 of the 5,200 licensed public houses in Scotland. SBPA and Licensing Reform in Scotland The SBPA, has been closely involved with the process of licensing reform in Scotland since the creation of the Nicholson Committee by the Scottish Executive's then Justice Minister, Rt Hon Jim Wallace MSP, in May 2001. Our former Chief Executive, Gordon Millar, served on the Nicholson Committee and was fully supportive of the final unanimous conclusions of the Nicholson Committee. SBPA as an organisation has supported the Nicholson Committee's recommendations, which we believed offered a consensus for progress on which the industry, licensing boards, the police and health bodies could agree. We agreed with the Nicholson proposals as a package and believe that their widespread support is recognised by the fact the most of the suggestions made by the Nicholson Committee are reflected in the Licensing (Scotland) Bill. SBPA has also served on the Expert Reference Group (ERG) which was established by the Scottish Executive to advise it on the procedural aspects of the licensing reform process. SBPA has played an active and constructive role in the Scottish Executive's consultations on licensing reform and welcomes the opportunity to continue with that involvement through the Scottish Parliament's deliberations on the Licensing (Scotland) Bill. Won't the new Licensing (Scotland) Bill mean that pubs will open twenty four hours? The Licensing Bill is not about introducing twenty four hour pub opening. Landlords and licensees don't want twenty four hour opening. A survey earlier this year of companies who own 30,500 pubs across the UK, conducted by our parent association the British Beer and Pub Association, found that the vast majority would only want to extend hours on Friday and Saturday nights and then only to 12.00 or 1.00 a.m. Not one pub wanted to stay open twenty four hours a day. Most publicans thought that twenty four hour opening would be not only undesirable but also uneconomic in terms of basic overhead increases like staff costs. Even if a licensee wanted to do so, the draft Licensing (Scotland) Bill will only allow the opening a licensed premises for twenty four hours in "exceptional circumstances." This is not a free for all - Licences will only be issued subject to the consent of councillors, police, environmental health and local residents. Ultimately local residents will have to be consulted and can object to any new licence application at any stage of the process. The abolition of the current "permitted hours" approach under the current Licensing Act is welcomed by the industry given that some which we believe has clearly outlived its usefulness given that 91% of all public houses and 88% of hotels have regular extensions to their hours in response to customer demand which were never envisioned under the 1976 Licensing Act. Isn't there a danger that replacing the current seven types of licence with just one type for premises licence will make it impossible for Licensing Boards to police licensed premises effectively? No. The licensed trade has developed very significantly over the last quarter of a century in response to customer demands with the development of the pub as a place offering entertainment and food, as well as alcohol. Many new licensed premises, so called "hybrids" can include bars, entertainment venues, a hotel as well as a restaurant and as such trying to license them under the current licensing regime is very difficult. Even with the single premises licence as proposed by the Licensing (Scotland) Bill licensees will still have to submit a detailed operating plan to the Licensing Board setting out the types of activity taking place on the premises and this will allow the Board to set the conditions they deem necessary to regulate these. Do you agree that there is a general "over provision" in the number of licensed premises in Scotland? No we don't. There may be specific concerns in particular locations and it is for individual licensing boards to exercise their local knowledge in addressing those, but we don't believe there are generally too many licensed pubs in Scotland given trends within the industry over the last quarter of a century. In the last quarter of a century, the number of licensed public houses in Scotland has increased by just 16%, compared to an increase in the number of off licensed premises, including supermarkets and grocer shops, of 30%. Given the marginal increase in alcohol consumption and the increasing emphasis on the food and non offer within licensed premises, this cannot be viewed as "over provision." Only 56% of the value of sales in a typical pub now come from alcohol. [Mintel] Indeed, there are only marginally more public house licences in force now than there were in 1998. [5,178 pub licences in 2004 as compared to 5,152 in 1998 - The Scottish Executive.] Shouldn't we introduce a moratorium on the issuing of new licences, as they have in the Republic of Ireland? No. We believe that stopping the issuing of new licences would simply drive up the paper value of licenses in Scotland and would act as a barrier to new operators taking over premises, stifling legitimate competition, and undermining attempts at improving the quality of the Scottish pub estate. It has been the case since 1902 in the Republic of Ireland that no new liquor licences have been issued, however, the Irish government recently consulted on opening up the licensed trade by issuing new café bar licences because of concerns that the current system has held back standards within the pub industry and not improved Ireland's drinking culture. Why are you opposed to "any person" being allowed to object to the operation of a licensed premises as planned in the Licensing (Scotland) Bill? We believe that allowing "any person" to object to the operation of a licensed premises will lead to unnecessary bureaucracy and cost within the licensing system. This is recognised by the Licensing (Scotland) Bill itself which says that Licensing Boards should not allow "frivalous or vexatious" objections. However, when the livelihood of a licensee is at stake we believe that many of them will seek legal advice and incur costs in dealing with objections that have little or no foundation. Even the Daniels Committee which looked at the licensing issues on behalf of the Scottish Executive only suggested allowing objections from those "with a real and material interest." Why shouldn't the larger operators pay more in licensing fees under the new regime? We have no objection to our members paying their fair share in terms of licensing fees. Our concern is that the industry as a whole could be on the receiving end of a very significant one off increase in fees. In England and Wales we have seen a quadrupling in the overall costs of the licensing system, with the estimated costs of reform to the industry being £120 million, not the £40 million originally envisaged. There is a risk that we could see the same in Scotland. Already, licensed premises pay significant amounts in business rates that are directly related to the turnover values of the properties, as well as additional amounts in business taxation and excise duties for the Chancellor of the Exchequer, totalling £22 billion a year across the UK. We are concerned that local government could create a highly expensive structure for licensing enforcement and administration that could introduce unnecessary costs. It should be remembered that whilst many pubs are part of retail pub chains, many of these premises are run as independent businesses, with individual operators leasing or managing premises that are part of those chains. Would you support the introduction of additional fees to cover the costs of additional policing because of the problems caused by anti-social behaviour? Scotland's licensed industry already pays significant amounts in business rates that are directly related to the rental and turnover values of the properties, as well as additional amounts in business taxation and the collection of excise duties for the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Overall across the UK the industry pays £22 billion in taxes in one form or another which is enough to pay for policing across the UK twice over. The industry fully supports the more rigorous enforcement of existing laws to tackle such issues as drunkenness and anti-social behaviour. We believe the more rigorous and visible application of laws on drunkenness would signal that such behaviour is neither accepted nor condoned by society and would deal with many of the problems. We believe that imposing additional costs on the licensed trade during the process of licensing reform would be unwarranted, as well as throwing up practical issues about how any additional charges would operate. We also shouldn't forget that 40% of alcohol consumed across the UK is sold through off licensed premises many of which do not operate in the areas where problems are caused. The vast majority of licensed public houses operate with minimal problems of public order, indeed if they didn't then their local Licensing Board would not allow them to trade. The Scottish Executive's own research on alcohol misuse suggests that alcohol misuse costs £1.1 billion in Scotland. Do you agree with that figure? The Scottish Executive report itself says of its own cost estimates that "those occurring out with the Health service should be treated with caution. Much of these are based on findings from research papers taken from the 'Alcohol Misuse in Scotland Trends and Costs' report, rather than any robust statistics." The NHS costs highlighted in the research paper account for less than 10% of the total costs. On that basis, using the Executive's own disclaimer, the other 90% plus of the £1.1 billion costs are not "robust" and should be treated with "caution." As an Association, we take very seriously the responsible use of alcohol and its misuse by a small minority of the Scottish public. However we do not believe that the Scottish Executive's figure portrays an accurate position regarding the health costs and indeed benefits of responsible alcohol consumption. It is established medical fact that moderate alcohol drinking, as practised by the vast majority of the population, has health benefits. It would be wrong to deny that there are no costs associated with alcohol misuse but we believe the current figures are questionable. One of the principles on which the Nicholson Committee based its consideration of reform of the licensing system in Scotland was: "Given that the majority of people in Scotland drink sensibly and responsibly, the licensing system should be as free from restrictions as possible." Why are you opposing the proposals in the Licensing (Scotland) Bill to introduce an "opt-in" system for pubs to allow them to admit young people under the age of eighteen? We note the Executive's intention through the Licensing Bill of "requiring licensees offering an on-sales service to think actively and seriously about whether their premises are suitable for children by choosing whether to "opt in" to access by children." In our earlier submissions to the Nicholson Committee and other Executive consultations we took the view that an "opt-out" system should apply to access to a licensed premises by children, whereby accompanied young people would have access unless a premises opted out of this arrangement. We believed this would help address the early education of young people in the acceptable and responsible supervised use of alcohol rather than continuing to present licensed premises as somewhere that they should not be allowed to enter. We still hold to that view. Why have you opposed proposals in the Licensing (Scotland) Bill on "irresponsible promotions"? We support action to tackle "irresponsible promotions," but we would suggest that the wording in the Bill is too prescriptive given that promotional activity is a legitimate tool for promoting new products, as distinct from simply selling alcohol cheaply. We are also concerned that the Scottish Executive are taking powers to apply restrictions to the off licensed sector but have given no indications at the moment that they will use them. There is already industry best practice on the conduct of "responsible promotions" which was recently relaunched and which has been previously endorsed by the Scottish Executive. We would suggest that there should some provision which would allow these limited promotions to continue in a better regulated way. Anecdotal evidence from our members suggests that there is an increasing trend, particularly amongst younger drinkers, of consuming alcohol purchased from the off sales sector at home, known as "pre-loading", and then coming out for an evening to frequent on sales premises, passing the consequent problems of "binge drinking" onto the on trade. We believe that should mean that any restrictions on the on trade as regards promotions should apply equally to the off trade, otherwise it risks simply displace the problem of "binge drinking" to other environments, most notably the home. Are there health benefits from the responsible consumption of alcohol? There is medical evidence that the moderate and responsible consumption of alcohol, as practised by the vast majority of the population, has health benefits. Those positive health benefits should be presented to the public as part of the information around alcohol and they should be allowed to make their own informed decisions about whether they want to consume alcohol or not. Moderate and responsible alcohol consumption is undoubtedly part of the package of measures which can benefit public health and that has been recognised by government. What reassurances are the licensed trade seeking in the transition to the new licensing regime? It is clear that in moving from the current licensing regime under the 1976 Licensing (Scotland) Act to the new regime that a process has to be agreed for this to happen as timeously and with as little upheaval as possible consistent with the new licensing structure. The licensed trade in Scotland requires certainty to secure current and future investment jobs and prosperity. In England and Wales, the Government has granted the licensed trade so called "grandfather rights," phraseology which has become linked to the transition process. Specifically in Scotland, we are proposing that the Parliament and Executive give "reassurances" to established businesses which enjoy the benefits of a liquor licence and hours in terms of the Licensing (Scotland) Act 1976 that they should have the presumption of being entitled to a premises licence with existing hours and the conditions relating to those hours and be excluded from having to provide Section 48 certification on the basis that such a presumption may be rebutted if it can be demonstrated by an objector that the operation of any such business materially contradicts the Licensing objectives. If an objector can demonstrate that the operation of any such business materially contradicts the Licensing Objectives then a premises licence for an established businesses should only be refused if the draft operating plan for such business cannot reasonably be amended to resolve such contradictions. We also believe that the transition from the current regime to the new one should be completed within as short a timescale as is possible consistent with good administration. Given that the process of licensing reform began in Scotland in May 2001 it's important that the process of licensing reform is completes as timeously as possible, consistent with good government. What is the industry doing to encourage the responsible consumption of alcohol? The industry is involved in a range of activities to encourage the responsible consumption of alcohol. Our parent Association, the BBPA is involved in various initiatives to promote responsible and moderate consumption of alcohol as are our members, including activities through the Portman Group. From a BBPA perspective: Improving performance and practice The British Beer & Pub Association has a series of good practice guides for the licensed trade which cover areas such as: Unit Labelling Guidelines The sensible drinking message is in terms of units of alcohol. Guidelines on how to convey information about the unit content in packaged alcoholic drinks has been developed by The Portman Group so that companies wishing to provide this information to consumers can adopt a similar format. A recent survey by BBPA suggests that "17 major British brewers will have unit labelling as standard on their beers by the end of 2005. As a result, 85 per cent of the beer sold in cans and bottles in the UK will be unit labelled. By this point, 84 per cent of bottles and cans will also carry a message encouraging people to drink responsibly." Initiatives to combat alcohol misuse "Global Social Responsibility Initiatives" is a publication produced by the British Beer & Pub Association on behalf of the Worldwide Brewing Alliance. It includes details of more than 360 initiatives from 34 different countries and covers campaigns and educational material on the subject of responsible or moderate consumption and deterring people from drinking and driving as well as information on codes of practice for responsible commercial communications, server training initiatives, workplace initiatives, company responsibility campaigns and research and publications funded by the brewing industry. Sensible Drinking The industry is committed to the Government sensible drinking message: "If you drink, enjoy drinking responsibly." In 1994 an Inter-Departmental working group reviewed the Government's sensible drinking message in the light of the latest scientific evidence. The findings were published in a report called "Sensible Drinking" in 1995. The conclusion of the report was that advice on sensible drinking should be as follows: MEN * The health benefit from drinking relates to men aged over 40 and the major part of this can be obtained at levels as low as one unit a day, with the maximum health advantage lying between 1 and 2 units. WOMEN * The health benefit from drinking for women relates to postmenopausal women and the major part of this can be obtained at levels as low as one unit a day, with the maximum health advantage lying between 1 and 2 units a day. It is important to remember that there are occasions when it is not sensible to drink at all. |
| |||
|
