Look beyond media hype

How was it for you? Over the next four pages, Ewan Turney wraps up our report with a look at the views of different sectors of the trade, starting with pubcos

Adrian Fawcett, chief operating officer, Punch

Overall impression: Generally, it has been successful in implementing the option to extend hours but the process was long and costly. Punch spent about 45,000 man hours processing applications.

Greatest hope: Flexibility - many pubs use their new licences to stay open for an extra hour or two to meet customer demand. Otherwise, my biggest hope is that in future the British public will start to use extended hours. There are slow signs it is happening.

Greatest fear: Red tape - it has put more burdens on entrepreneurial licensees and we are urging the Government not to place any further financial penalties on the industry by increasing the fees for personal and premises licences. The media hype surrounding 24-hour opening times is nothing more than that, with only seven pubs in our estate (that's 0.073%) having 24-hour licences. The average Punch pub has an extra 6.5 hours trading time a week.

Main benefits: Separating the personal licence holder from the premises licence was a good move and we will get a better-trained workforce as a result. The new regime has highlighted the opportunity for pubs to open earlier rather than later, and to capitalise on the growing café culture.

Customers are also not being forced onto the streets together every night and this has had a beneficial effect on minimising disruption. Government reported that violent crimes recorded by the police in England and Wales fell 11% at the end of last year, despite longer pub opening hours

In terms of sales, it is too early to tell. We need a full year, minimum, to assess changes in consumer spending but we don't think it has had any dramatic impact.

Issues to be addressed: We still do not actually have the physical copies of licences at 8.5% of our estate. From guidance, we want a simplification of the process and greater clarity on what is related to licensing, and what should be covered under other legislation. From fees, we want current levels to be maintained because, while we feel they are expensive compared to the previous regime and an added cost for licensees, they are more than enough to cover ongoing costs if local authorities work consistently under current guidelines.

Implementation: A lot of councils did a great job at short notice and with little support. The problem has been consistency. The Government did well, in respect of the idea and in the face of the media hype, to push it through. Punch is proud of the job it did. We will eventually see better service for consumers and this is what it is all about.

Alison Woodfine, director, Tadcaster pubco

Overall impression: The system is more bureaucratic and expensive.

Greatest hope: I hoped that the system would be a smooth transition and more straightforward. Unfortunately, while some elements, such as DPS changes, are relatively easy to action, variations to premises licences are unwieldy.

Greatest fear: I feared that the new system would give undue weight to neighbours in residential areas.

This has happened, as licence hearings have been held, sometimes purely on the evidence of residents, where issues of noise/public nuisance have been raised, without any concerns being raised by responsible authorities (such as police and environmental health).

Main benefits: The ability to change trading hours to suit individual businesses. This has meant that many pubs have been able to retain trade which would previously have migrated to city-centre bars and nightclubs.

Issues to be addressed: The need to place advertisements of licence variations in local newspapers should be scrapped because the cost is prohibitive. We suspect that little (if any) representations have been received as a result of these adverts. Most objections would be raised by local residents who can easily see the A4 notices that must be displayed in our windows. There should be a facility for submitting minor changes, such as small bar alterations and minor layout changes, without the need for a full variation application.

The need to send paper copies to so many different responsible authorities should also be reviewed. Surely email should be acceptable for most parties.

There must be clarification of the DPS role. We have issued our pubs with a simple nomination sheet, so that the DPS can name senior bar staff that can be in charge of the premises while the DPS is away from the pub for any reason.

We have done this as a covering exercise, just in case any over-zealous officials demand the presence of the DPS. We, and these officials, need unambiguous guidance on this matter.

Implementation: While some councils have done a fantastic job under pressure, we are still awaiting 10% of our licences, which surely means the system is flawed. Councils using different software packages means there is no standard format of a premises licence - apparently a number of software suppliers were used, to avoid a monopoly.

Adam Luck, estates director, St Austell

Overall impression of the new licensing regime: A major amount of work and expense for limited benefit.

Greatest hope: We were hoping for a more relaxed atmosphere during closing time, which would lead to a drop in alcohol-related violence and a modest increase in trade. The first two have definitely been achieved but the new licensing regime hasn't increased trade.

Greatest fear: We feared an increase in complaints and representations from neighbours and other interested parties, and interference from local authorities. These fears were not realised.

Main benefits: The more relaxed atmosphere at closing time makes late evenings in the pub a more enjoyable experience for everyone.

Issues to be addressed: The annual renewal dates need to be addressed because the current process puts us at a disadvantage, and we worked hard to apply for licences early. The annual renewal should be the anniversary of the second appointed day for all.

Implementation: Overall, a good job although we've been disappointed with local authorities' delays in issuing licences and with the mistakes we've seen on some of them.