Gareth Hughes, director at Jeffrey Green Russell, said police consistently attribute crime and disorder to licensed premises without providing evidence to back it up, in order to “fabricate” a case and rubber-stamp measures that penalise pubs and bars.
'Skewed picture'
He said police are “not making up” evidence, but the use of “select and surface-level statistics” creates a “skewed picture” of the night-time economy and they are “very reluctant” to give further detail when requested. As such he said he “very rarely” gets the information he needs before committees move to decisions.
Speaking at the BII’s (British Institute of Innkeeping) London Region meeting last week, he said: “The evidence going forward to local authorities is usually presented by the police and in many cases it’s quite dodgy.
“There’s a theory that because there’s a licensed trade in an area all crime emanates from it; that’s how it’s put in some of the hearings.
'Fabricate a case'
“One gets the impression the police select evidence to fabricate a case for the committee, for the imposition of either an LNL or EMRO. You have no idea of the hour the crimes are committed, and whether they are to do with the hospitality sector at all.”
He said statistics presented during the LNL hearing in Newcastle, Tyne & Wear, were “particularly dodgy”. He also cited procedural errors during the consultation on an EMRO in Blackpool, Lancashire.
Legal expert Peter Coulson agreed that police evidence is “selective” and must be closely examined in detail to get “the true picture”.
'They don't like to be challenged'
“From cases I’ve seen, lawyers for the trade have dug a little deeper and discovered police evidence is not all it’s cracked up to be,” he said. “It’s sometimes quite difficult to prise more information out of the police. They don’t like to be challenged or to have to provide extra evidence.”
Michelle Hazlewood, partner at John Gaunt & Partners, also said police evidence is “very often wholly inappropriate”, and police forces are either “genuinely reluctant” or too under-resourced to provide sufficient detail.
Statistics 'not fit for purpose'
However, Kate Nicholls, strategic affairs director at the Association of Licensed Multiple Retailers, said misleading evidence is often not the fault of police but down to the fact that national statistics are “not fit for purpose” for making evidence-based decisions.
“There is no national definition of alcohol-related crime and no national standards for gathering statistics, so local authorities and police are free to make up their own definitions,” she said. “You end up with issues that are nothing to do with pubs, being caught up in licensing evidence.”
Legal costs
National policing lead for alcohol harm and licensing Chief Constable Adrian Lee said: “Evidence presented to authorities is best submitted on a partnership basis by all those who think that an LNL or EMRO would help address problems in a particular area and decisions should not rely on police data alone.
“These measures are designed to support councillors making local decisions based on evidence presented by police, partners and communities, but there are fears that legal costs and other issues are getting in the way of councillors deciding what’s best for their town centres.”