Peers issue call for evidence on Licensing Act 2003, appoint Clover to advise

The House of Lords select committee investigating the effectiveness of the Licensing Act 2003 has published a call for evidence.

The committee has also appointed Sarah Clover, a barrister at Kings Chambers, to be its specialist legal adviser.

Areas that the committee has said it will look at include:

• the balance between rights and responsibilities of both the industry and the public;
• the powers of enforcement authorities, including the police;
• the impact that any greater availability of alcohol has had on the health of the population;
• whether the Act has made it easier or harder for communities to enjoy activities that have to be licensed under the Act;
• the role of licensing in shaping local areas, for the benefit of the economy and the local community;
• minimum unit pricing and its potential impact; and
• fees and costs associated with the Act.

Interested parties have been invited to submit evidence to the committee by 2 September 2016.

Baroness McIntosh of Pickering, chairman of the select committee, said: "The Licensing Act 2003 enabled premises to serve alcohol for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. While many heralded the Act as the start of a more continental drinking culture, others predicted round-the-clock consumption, leading to disorder and a deterioration in public health.

"But what has the reality actually been like? Has deregulation allowed the drinks industry to thrive? Have drinkers embraced a more relaxed and healthier approach to alcohol? What happened to the anticipated café culture?

"For good or ill, the Licensing Act has altered the drinking landscape of England and Wales, but an examination of the changes is long overdue. I would therefore encourage as many people as possible to send us written evidence before our deadline of 2 September."

The committee is scheduled to report by 23 March 2017.

A Home Office paper submitted to the committee last month said the 2003 Act would remain “a fundamental pillar in both national and local regulatory frameworks”.

It noted that the legislation’s key principles and objectives had endured, “as its application in practice has proved capable of evolving and adapting to balance divergent interests”.

The Home Office also argued that while there had been in excess of 100 cases which cited the 2003 Act, other than a very small number related to section 53C, these had not called into question the drafting of the legislation or raised issues of public concern.