Council chiefs have urged the Government to implement plans to give councillors more say over licensing "as swiftly as possible".
They say it's a better alternative to the "ill-targeted" mandatory alcohol retailing code, which would force new trading restrictions on well-run pubs.
Under plans announced by the Government this week, councillors and licensing officers will get the power to instigate a review of a licence themselves, rather than wait for local people or police to raise concerns.
Cllr Chris White, chair of the Local Government Association's Culture, Tourism and Sport Board, said: "Councils are working hard to make our streets safer and more attractive places to be during popular drinking times. These new powers allow councils to design innovative, locally appropriate solutions, and to have recourse to real action where partners don't play ball.
"We need to ensure, though, that councillors are given the rights of 'interested parties' and have the power to speak on behalf of their constituents at licensing committee hearings. This is a basic right of democratic representation.
"Government should bring in these new powers as swiftly as possible. Councils and the LGA will work with them to design legislation that can help stem the tide of binge-drinking and anti-social behaviour without penalising well run pubs and restaurants."
Cllr Paul Bettison, chairman of local government co-ordinator LACORS, said: "The LGA Group has long campaigned to put councillors at the heart of the licensing regime.
"The Prime Minister's intention to introduce powers to allow councillors to limit 24-hour drinking across their borough and to call for a review of a premises licence is a victory for the LGA Group and for common sense.
"Councillors and licensing officers know which premises on their patch are the 'bad apples', and need the powers to take action against them.
"Locally-led action, in partnership with the police, council trading standards services and the licensed trade will be far more effective at tackling anti-social behaviour than the ill-targeted and top-down mandatory code that is currently being debated."