Comments on: Licensing

By: MJ Reid

MJ Reid — Fri, 03 Jun 2011 09:42:36 +0000

200 people came and enjoyed it. One neighbour complained. Just one.

I posted a response about how licences are given out – and hte need for more “bureacracy” not less. And this is why. What do I mean? You think 200 people coming to your event and paying you fro the priviledge is great. Neighbours do not want 200 people attending venues in their area – noise, litter, increased traffic, etc – and drunkenness. So from the point of view of a neighbour, we need more noise abatement officers, etc not less.

By: MJ Reid

MJ Reid — Fri, 03 Jun 2011 09:35:51 +0000

Although Licensing is a devolved matter in Scotland, I would like to see a public risk assessment carried out every time that a licence application is made. More bureaucracy rather than less. Yes! Why? How often are neighbours and their views taken into account when licences are given out – especially in mixed areas – residential and commercial as there is in many towns and cities across the UK. Where I live there are 5 restaurants, a pub and a whisky shop – oh, and a laundrette on one side of hte block and on the other a hotel with restaurant and bar. The noise from patrons and from delivery vans and bin lorries is immense. We, as neighbours, are only inconvenienced by all of these premises, not as the council tells us – living in an area that is enhanced by the presence of these businesses.

By: Martin Weller

Martin Weller — Fri, 03 Jun 2011 01:21:43 +0000

Police sensibly, not violently. Venues take responsibility to refuse service to those who are clearly out of control. Keep music live!

By: Robert Kitchen

Robert Kitchen — Thu, 02 Jun 2011 10:37:32 +0000

When a new licenced premises is planned, plans have to go for Building Regulations Approval. EHOs are consulted during this process before building even starts. Much later, when a Premises Licence is sought, plans go back to the EHO who then looks at them in a different way and sometimes gives advice that would have been cheaper to implement if flagged in the first process. It would save some frustration (and cost) for those opening new businesses to enable/ encourage EHOs to give all advice at the earliest stage.

By: Nick Wilkinson (Flamenco Guitarist)

Nick Wilkinson (Flamenco Guitarist) — Wed, 01 Jun 2011 18:59:43 +0000

As a performing artist, who is directly affected by music licensing, I would like to say congratulations for sticking a big stick in the spokes of our community. The only people that can generally afford live music licences are crooks. Believe me when I say I have played in some shady establishments. The situation is such that I seldom bother to perform anymore.

A healthy society does not have cultural restrictions imposed on its music. Only dictatorships wear that kind of badge. Music is one of the cornerstones of civilization – mess with it and you’ll create a dumb breed. The very thought that people get paid a salary for perpetrating such socially undesirable circumstances is not only diabolical but it quite simply makes the blood boil.

The licensing is wrong, unethical and extremely thoughtless.

By: Nick Wilkinson (Flamenco Guitarist)

Nick Wilkinson (Flamenco Guitarist) — Wed, 01 Jun 2011 18:54:11 +0000

As a performing artist, who is directly affected by music licensing, I would like to say congratulations for sticking your big stick in the spokes of our community.

The only people that can generally afford live music licences are crooks. Believe me when I say I have played in some shady establishments. The situation is such that I seldom bother to perform anymore.

A healthy society does not have cultural restrictions imposed on its music. Only dictatorships wear that kind of badge. Music is the cornerstones of many civilizations – mess with it and you’ll create a dumb breed.

The very thought that people get paid a salary for perpetrating such socially undesirable circumstances is not only diabolical but it quite simply makes the blood boil.

The licensing is wrong, unethical and extremely thoughtless.

By: graham clack

graham clack — Wed, 01 Jun 2011 15:41:10 +0000

Do away with the requirement to report to the police if a licence is lost – even if stolen it is of no use to anyway and duplicates are normally asked for when mis-laid not stolen
There are too many criminal offences such as one for not returning a licence to be amended if a dps has notified they no longer want to be the dps. In those circumstances, the owner would apply to vary the dps as otherwise they can’t sell alcohol, and if instead they stop trading completely (unlikely just because a dps has left) then it makes no odds anyway. Plus in theory you can serve a application by internet and for the council to distribute, but the system you have to use, for a variety of reasons, means it’s unlikely to be used by companies that lodge many applications. Surely it would be better all round if you could just send pdf’s and word docs through as attachments – it’d would be a lot more simple

By: Stuart Alder (landlord)

Stuart Alder (landlord) — Wed, 01 Jun 2011 13:38:28 +0000

Oh where do we start? About ten years ago, I had to apply for a licence for the restaurant I ran. I filled in a form, a copy of which went to the local police, went to the magistrates court, and was granted the licence. £30 fee. More recently, I changed the licence to a “premesis licence” £300 fee, plus copies to the local council (instead of the magistrates) police and fire service. The fire service makes sense, sure, but why the increase of 900%? Why? because the new licensing department of the local council had hired four new staff on £25,000 each to do the work of two old staff at the Police station on £15,000 each. I know, because my brother was one of the police staff. Fast forward to two years ago. Same application, but this time i had to give copies of the application to nine different agencies: Local Council (licencing), Local Council (planning), Local council (building regs), Police Service, Fire Service, County Council (child protection officer), Customs & Excise, County Council (trading standards) and there is one other I can’t even remember! The fee was higher again about £400.

Also, I run a restaurant that is in a pub. It was very run down, and full of under-age kids, and drug-users. We converted it, and rennovated it, and turned it around. Last summer we held a beer festival outside, and had some live music. One neighbour complained. Just one. two hundred people came and enjoyed it, and it was a really pleasant, family event. The neighbour complained directly to the local council officer (a new sub-department of Environmental Health) who gave us a Noise abatement notice. The only way we can appeal this is by taking them to court, but they can give them out with no court order. They can give us a noise abatement notice in a matter of days or weeks, but an appeal has taken about ten months, and cost us a huge amount of money & time.

Licensing: Go back to the old, magistrate & police method. It is cheaper, faster, more efficient, and more condusive to a polite society. Sack off all new licensing staff from local authorities.

By: Jenney Robinson

Jenney Robinson — Wed, 01 Jun 2011 12:52:47 +0000

With reference to Alex Walkers comments why do people find it necessary to drink before they go out unless it is with the intention of getting drunk. The problem is with society and it’s current attitudes not with legislstion. And by the way yes I do drink but not to excess.

By: Roger Gall

Roger Gall — Wed, 01 Jun 2011 08:49:07 +0000

I can well understand your concern for noise and I can also understand your confusion here. But neither the additional entertainment licensing in TENs or a full Premises Licence can give permission for noise pollution. These can only give permission for entertainment/alcohol etc.and your problem is with noise pollution.

Actual noise pollution from all sources needs to be dealt with by use of the correct legislation. Where actual noise pollution may be emanating from entertainment – for which additional licensing permission is in place – or for which no additional licensing permission is required – this is still the case.

So why do people still think that additional licensing permission is of any use to deal with noise pollution – In this regard – it exists only as a means to further confuse the issue?