The comments by Councillor Geoffrey Theobald of LACORS, the local authority regulatory body, in his letter to the MA last week on the smoking ban are welcome - particularly the news that local authorities are trying to get "ahead of the game", for once.
Perhaps the lessons of the transition debacle have come home - more so if the councillor also read page 3 to discover just how many licences are still outstanding 18 months after the whole affair began.
What possible excuse could there be? Ah well, we're dealing with politicians here - there's bound to be one.
The positive recommendation is, of course, that licensees need to be on the move right now in planning for the ban - a point which this newspaper consistently highlights. But I want to add a couple of extra issues which will assume greater prominence as we get closer.
The first is planning. Pertinent points could be raised by the licensed trade in its discussions with LACORS on the extent of its influence on the council planning department, because I can see some problems ahead, depending on the type and size of the "structure" which is to be introduced.
Remember, also, that any planning consent required can take months to achieve. There are many in the licensed trade who can testify to having experienced terrible delays in obtaining approval for extensions or alterations. Some have managed the application with less trouble, but one or two may have run up against some opposition.
I agree that until the actual regulations are available in black and white, it is difficult to move on the question of planning approval. The proposal to engage with the Department of Health consultation will not really assist the individual licensee, who simply wants to know what kind of structure will be acceptable.
There is also a hint of disinformation going on in relation to the premises licence itself. It is just not true to claim that if the proposed area for a smoking "gazebo" is within the area covered by the licence, it cannot be used. There is no suggestion that smokers must move
"off the premises" - merely into an area that is not "enclosed or substantially enclosed." So the relevant regulations under the Act must give us all a clear guidance on what that means.
It is, of course, important for licensees to know exactly what areas are covered by the premises licence, and it is clear to me that not all transition applications made last year included plans that clarified this point. Gardens have always been problematic in terms of licensing; I thoroughly disagreed
with the Good Practice Guide on this very point and had some interesting debates with justices' clerks as a result.
While consumption of alcohol itself is not a licensable activity, there may be some restrictions or conditions on the use of the garden area, together with constraints on noise and lighting. Be prepared for growing neighbourhood concern when residents suddenly see new structures erected next to their garden wall and face the prospect of "rowdy" smokers spending half the evening carousing in
the corner, accompanied by louder-than-necessary background music from the 20 new speakers hidden in the bushes!
Pubs that already have well-used garden or patio areas have a head start: in the past I used a very nice pub near Hampstead Heath where I hardly ever went into the bars - it even had an al fresco real-ale dispense point which suited me fine! It will be those hostelries that are situated cheek-by-jowl with residential properties and suddenly make use of previously quiet back yards that will elicit the loudest howls of protest.