• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Alcohol Licensing and children

Status
Not open for further replies.

DaveNewcastle

Established Member
Joined
21 Dec 2007
Messages
7,387
Location
Newcastle (unless I'm out)
[I inadvertently caused offence by posting this in another section of the forum which refered to children and pubs.
It might be of interest to others in its own thread.]
The combination of children and pubs has been connected to problems and consequencies to the extent that, since this April, the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act has changed the 2003 Licensing Act (E&W) to ensure that the local Primary Care Trust and Child Protection Agency are statutory consultees in Licence applications.

The consequence of this is that, since April, Doctors with concerns for health and Child Protection Officers have taken opportunities to insist on Conditions to new Premises Licences which attempt to prevent allowing children access to Licensed premises, even to prevent children being 'exposed' to the consumption of alcohol; this could have consequences for gardens attached to pubs.

I worked on a Licence application recently for an established shop with a cafe located on a major cycle route, which provides snacks, meals and non-alcoholic drinks to visitors and family groups enjoying the views (many of whom do not arrive by cycle). The Child Protection Agency didn't want children to be admitted to the shop, even if accompanied by adults, as there may have been someone in the cafe area consuming alcohol. They required the premises to have a policy which ensured that young people who may be nearby for other reasons would not be 'exposed' to the consumption of alcohol by people sittng outside the cafe.
The PCT wanted staff to monitor the consumption of alcohol by cyclists (although there is an established real-ale pub frequented by cyclists less than 100meters away) to avoid the risk of drunken cycling.

These changes apply to new Licence applications or to substantial variations to existing Licences, not to the Conditions which apply to established pubs or other Licensed premises.

We can imagine the consequences of these restrictions on country parks, pubs on station platforms etc. if any new Licence applications were to come forward.

Any thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

D841 Roebuck

Established Member
Joined
16 Mar 2012
Messages
2,075
Location
Rochdale
The PCT / CPA in this case seem to be making a strong bid for ridicule.

All that's required to deal with children in pubs is a taser for when they misbehave...
 

LexyBoy

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
4,478
Location
North of the rivers
I find it very depressing.

How are children and young people supposed to learn about sensible behaviour when more and more "adult" activities are not only forbidden from them but hidden under the carpet. Pretending that people suddenly become adults capable of making decisions on their own at some arbitrary age is ridiculous enough without hiding away from them the things which become permitted to them at 18. Look at the US where (AIUI) it's even more taboo for those underage to be "exposed" to alcohol - then when at college, with no moderating influence, they reach the age where they are allowed alcohol. From what I've seen, the results outdo a lot of Britain's much-maligned "binge drinking" culture.

The introduction of yet more "can't, mustn't" areas for children and young people will also not do anything for the disenfranchisement felt by many young people, particularly when the rules will appear not to be there for any good reason.

Sure, if the aim is for everyone to live as long as possible then drinking would be banned. So would caffeine, cake, dangerous sports, etc etc. If the aim is for people to have an enjoyable life with good health and a good interactions with others, surely we should be encouraging a sensible attitude to alcohol (and all the other "bad" things which make life more enjoyable). For example, I personally think a pub serving someone who is drunk should be treated more harshly than one serving a 17 year old, whereas in fact most pubs are terrified of accidentally doing the latter but do the former day in, day out.

People seem to be spending more and more time in more private surroundings, looking out at the world through TV and social media rather than actually being out in it. This I think is happening anyway but the fact that it's getting cheaper and cheaper to drink at home rather than in the pub is reinforcing the trend. This I think creates exactly the sort of message about alcohol that we should be avoiding - i.e. it's something routine, rather than something for a social setting - as well as distancing people from their fellow citizens.

IMO the only ways to solve our nation's "problem" with alcohol is to move the country approximately 1000 miles south, or to accept drinking as part of our culture, just as the French do striking and superiority (oh, and drinking more per capita than the UK).

</rant>
 

Oswyntail

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2009
Messages
4,183
Location
Yorkshire
I am a bit puzzled. As far as I know there is no such body as the "Child Protection Agency", with responsibility for Child Protection matters being delegated to local authorities to make their own arrangements. It is quite reasonable for PCTs (which are, of course, about to be abolished, so presumably CCGs may take on this role) to be consulted on licensing applications as there could be public health implications. Likewise it is sensible for the local authority to be consulted to see if there are Child Protection issues. And there is no addition to red tape involved.
The case described does seem to show the relevant authorities going over the top. However, as they are both local organisations, they could simply be reflecting what their local community thinks. There is certainly no national government policy to restrict alcohol in country parks or railway stations.
Personally I agree that the French have it just about right by exposing children to alcohol from an early age, so that it doesn't pick up the sleazy glamour to be found in the typical British pub (a type of establishment I actually intensely dislike!)
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
6,876
Location
UK
Okay? so what about cricket clubs? they often have a Bar on site? or Tesco, they sell booze, are they going to ban childeren. Or have alcohol behind some plain doors behind the counters?

Drinking is part of our culture, as it is with most human societies. Unfortunately our government seem to think it is better to have childeren drinking questionable vodka on parks with their friends, than in a pub with your dad and his mates.
 

scotsman

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2010
Messages
3,252
Interesting, given that my own employers currently advertise the fact that anyone 16+ can come in unaccompanied (obviously not to drink, and only in England, Wales and N.I.)

Anyway, the change to the law is pointless as there is already existing legislation to prevent the consumption of alcohol by persons under the age of 18 (except in a few circumstances, but most premises prefer not to allow those), so that there should be absolutely no chance of anyone within the boundaries of the premises consuming alcohol, as such a situation could lead to legal action against the owner, the manager and the person who sold the alcohol.

In situations where station platforms are concerned, context of the location should be made central to the application (don't know the legalities - certainly if possible) - it would seem that children would be prohibited entry, but since barring entry to the platform is impractical, and prevents access to the railway, it should not be included.
 

DaveNewcastle

Established Member
Joined
21 Dec 2007
Messages
7,387
Location
Newcastle (unless I'm out)
I am a bit puzzled. As far as I know there is no such body as the "Child Protection Agency", with responsibility for Child Protection matters being delegated to local authorities to make their own arrangements.
That is true.
I used Agency is a general sense, perhaps I shouldn't have used a capital letter. A great many local authorities have a "Safeguarding Children Board" which makes representations in the interests of protecting children from harm.

There is certainly no national government policy to restrict alcohol in country parks or railway stations.
Again, that is quite true. My remark, based on the example given, was an extrapolation to an imagined application for a new Premises Licence in such places, and where there may be representations from a child protection agency/board/department. I have struggled in the past to secure Premises Licences for large outdoor spaces where the range of activities may be very broad (including Festival events), and the Authorities (such as the Police and Environmental Health) have been concerned about the worst-case possibilities, but seeking to impose conditions that would apply at other times. To apply the concerns I was faced with in the recent example I reported to any large outdoor spaces seeking a Premises Licence would justify my concerns (note I'm only referring to permanently Licenced outdoor spaces, not to Country Parks!).

Personally I agree that the French have it just about right by exposing children to alcohol from an early age, so that it doesn't pick up the sleazy glamour to be found in the typical British pub (a type of establishment I actually intensely dislike!)
One of the Police Licensing Officers I work with shares this view, as do I!

In situations where station platforms are concerned, context of the location should be made central to the application (don't know the legalities - certainly if possible) - it would seem that children would be prohibited entry, but since barring entry to the platform is impractical, and prevents access to the railway, it should not be included.
I was only considering bars or cafes on Stations which held a Premsies Licence, not platforms!
 

Oswyntail

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2009
Messages
4,183
Location
Yorkshire
Thanks, Dave. I am now considerably less puzzled.
I suspect that this country's puritan past has left it with a double attitude to alcohol. We tend first to demonise it, confine it to dark dens of vice, sneer at "binge drinkers" and try to protect our children from it. Then we praise the "British pub", glorify the 12 pints a night lads and smile indulgently when teenagers blag their first drink in a pub. We feel we can't have a good time without booze, and mock those who prefer fruit juice as "anti-social", yet, let's face it, quite a few of the experiences around drink are unpleasant (did anyone ever enjoy their first taste of beer or whisky? Why does anyone drink till they vomit? Does anyone enjoy a hangover?). Perhaps this goes back further than the Puritans, to the blend of Roman and Germanic cultures in the dark ages.
 

D841 Roebuck

Established Member
Joined
16 Mar 2012
Messages
2,075
Location
Rochdale
When the first European Universities started the English Scholars were famed for their drunkenness.
 

cuccir

Established Member
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
3,672
There's a lot of interesting academic work on the history of drinking/alcohol.

Bar Wars by Phil Hadfield (including a very interesting ethnography of being an 'expert witness' in licensing cases) and The Politics of Alcohol by James Nicholls are both worth a read.

From what I've read, it seems that over time different policies on alcohol can change how we drink, where we drink and what we drink but that historically, the amount fluctuates around the same level. Interestingly the last peak in alcohol consumption was in 2000-2005, which represented a steady rise since Wolrd War Two. It's actually dropped slightly over the last few years.

Re Dave's post - I suppose the question is whether the case(s) Dave is speaking of reflect a national attitude, or just the decision of one local officer/team? In other words, would other local agencies have taken the same decisions?
 

DaveNewcastle

Established Member
Joined
21 Dec 2007
Messages
7,387
Location
Newcastle (unless I'm out)
. . . . the question is whether the case(s) Dave is speaking of reflect a national attitude, or just the decision of one local officer/team? In other words, would other local agencies have taken the same decisions?
I must admit that, within my very limited experience, I encounter inconsistencies between different Authorities, between different Officers representing their own areas of an authority's area, and between Officers when they move and are replaced by another.

However, the changes brought about by the amendments in April are all in the one direction : towards greater controls placed on new applications (but not retrospecively applied to existing Premises) following broader opportunities for 'representations' to an application. The main changes I'm focussing on here are the 2 new 'agencies' who will be consulted, and they don't appear to have accepted their new opportunity to comment in silence; it would be improper of me to quote some of the more astonishing proposals here, and one Licensing Officer agreed with me that they couldn't see the point in a Child Protection condition nor that it could be enforced.

Others across E & W will be hearing the same concerns about young people and risks to health in awarding a Licence.
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
17,375
Location
0036
For a while Ireland had a law requiring alcoholic beverages to be sold only from a separate part of the store with a walled-off segment, into which under-18s would not be allowed to go. It worked for a while and then got watered down by the retail and vintners' lobby, so now the rule is that alcohol can only be sold at designated tills. The supermarkets proceeded to put up "alcohol may be sold at this till" signs at every single till! A new version of the restriction is being phased back in slowly.

There was an exemption for off-licenses which were then only allowed to sell a certain list of things not containing alcohol.
 

starrymarkb

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2009
Messages
5,985
Location
Exeter
I thought in Northern Ireland they had to have separate tills for under 18s as under 18s couldn't be served at a till that could sell booze
 

pompeyfan

Established Member
Joined
24 Jan 2012
Messages
4,352
semi related, and being a personal licence holder myself i should know better, but this morning on 'saturday kitchen live' on BBC1 they were recommending a wine whilst looking around a waitrose... he then poured some into a glass and drunk it in the middle of the shop...

my understanding is that a premises licence still requires to state for consumption either on, or off, (or both) of the premises and that waitrose licence is likely to state for consumption off the premises. this would then mean that the BBC and waitrose are both partaking in unlicensed drinking, and therefore are actually breaking the law? could someone please back me up or prove me wrong, as it's one of those little things that are irritating me.
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
17,375
Location
0036
It's OK as long as they didn't pay. You do not need a licence to give people alcohol for free, such as in airport lounges.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top