Donning, in a mildly puerile effort at tongue-in-cheekedness, a pair of cuff-links each broadcasting the slogan "My Official Drinking Arm," I headed to London on Monday to take part in the latest round of meetings by the Government in to what should be done with the licensing laws next.
The Home Office's consultations are currently being held around the country to give everybody involved in the alcohol trade and licensing laws the opportunity to say what, if any, changes should be made.
So it was slightly disappointing, upon my arrival, to note the lack of attendance from the pub sector and the on-trade. Poorly represented by the pub trade and over attended by the civil servants who enforce the laws, it was clear from the outset that the mentality of those helping shape the next stage in the Licensing Act were not in favour of licensees.
Sat around tables, each furnished with a computer to take information from the attendants in a quick-fire, Who Wants To Be A Millionaire sort of way, we were set tasks and objectives and asked to answer questions on Theresa May's proposed changes. And this was where the whole consultation process failed.
With one of the tables consisting purely of police officers and another of licensing officers, and with trading standards officers and community representatives mingled throughout, this was not a fair and independent court.
When the question "what should be the minimum ban on selling alcohol for persistent offenders?" (in relation to breaching conditions of license or serving, for example, to underage customers) was asked, fifty percent of the attendees stipulated two weeks. Two weeks?! As a minimum?
The shortest option we were given was forty eight hours, but that was felt by many to be too fair.
The police officer on my table stated that then she wouldn't have to worry about that particular pub, and the more that were closed down the easier her job would be.
No consideration was given to the licensee at all. If I break the law I do expect to be punished, but a minimum two week 'closure' would put me - and many other licensees - out of business. Especially as a persistent offender is somebody who offends twice. You might as well just fine me £20k and send me to jail for all the good it would do.
As the Ask The Audience style consultation progressed it was voted two to one in favour of keeping the Mandatory Code and discussions were held on restricting the availability and flexibility of Temporary Event Notices.
TENs are the bane of my life in their current format but suggestions were put to the Home Office that the application period should be increased from ten working days to twenty eight, that fewer can be applied for by licensees and that conditions should be able to be applied to them.
If ever there was a process that was going to stop people having parties in pubs and village halls and instead buying cheap alcohol from the supermarket and drinking themselves stupid at home, curbing the TEN process would be it.
Banning the sale of below-cost product was the Home Office's sop towards the off-trade's approach to alcohol, but left the majority in attendance vexed. After all, these aren't people running a business, so they were unable to establish just what you class as 'below cost'. Surely, then, if we're to keep the Mandatory Code it would simply be easier to lump such sales under its definition of 'irresponsible promotions'?
The subject of allowing communities to dabble in the affairs of their local outlets also came up, prompting one clever dick to be a pedant and ask for a definition of communities: "who," he asked, "is the community? The youth community? The Muslim community? The elderly community? Please," he wailed, "can we not say neighbourhood?"
However politically correct you want to be, allowing the locals to dictate how the pub is run will simply see the demise of yet more community-led pubs. Any licensee knows how annoying it is when customers put forward suggestions of what they should be doing with the pub, invariably because the cost and administration of such things is lost on the customer, but allowing them to enforce their views is tantamount to disaster.
As I sat and listened to the discussions around me, it became obvious that the licensed trade aren't going to be offered the chance to go Fifty-Fifty or to even Ask A Friend. With no true representation from our trade, May's department will simply look at the statistical responses and think her views are justified. Then these changes to the Licensing Act are going to get railroaded through regardless of our point of view.
Just like the Mandatory Code did.
Charity Ride
I'd just like to say thank you to everybody who supported me and my friends in our recent sixty mile charity bike ride. Along with my friends, I completed the event in five hours and fifteen minutes (4hrs 08 riding time, the rest sitting around waiting for the others to catch up!) and raised over £2'200 for charity.