 Jog heddiw, pob. Hefyd yna'n bwysig. It's a flat word of, um... Sorry about that, chair. Are we? We are on the second out, we're running through the bottom. Okay. Right. Going to start again. Um, so... Right. Right from the beginning? Right from the beginning, I'm sorry, chair. Okay. Thank you. So, welcome to the Licensing Committee, which is at South Cam's Hall and on Thursday the 19th of October at 10AM. Mae'n angen i chi dweud hynny'n gwirio, ac mae angen i chi dweud hefyd. Mae enw i wedi'i'n gweithio, gwirio i'r ddod. Gweithio'n ddod, mae'n gwirio i'r ddod, a'n gwirio i'r ddod i'r ddod, yng Nghymru Annika Osbourne, ac i'r ddod o'r'r gweithfodd yng Nghymru, esbyty o'r honno, Jos Hale, Corren Garvey, Shabona Bataeciaia, Judith Ripeth a Bunty Waters. Roeddwn i'n gweithfodd. Felly we've got Councillor Peter Saund for attending online. Thank you very much. So I'd like to go round the room to clarify who's here. So Councillor Howell, would you like to introduce yourself? Rydda di-sia-fawr here, Chairman. My name is Mark Howell, and I'm one of the members that represent the Caxton and Papawth Ward. Thank you very much. Good morning, my name is Councillor Lisa Redruff, and I'm one of the members that represents Haarston and Combaton Ward. Thank you, and the councillors. I'm Councillor Eileen Wilson, and I represent Cotten and Ward. Thank you, and I'm Councillor Annabraith, and I represent Milton and Waterbeach Ward. Sorry, and Councillor Sanford, would you like to introduce yourself? Yes, thank you, Chair. Peter Sanford, the other Member for Caxson and Papworth Ward. Thank you. Other people in the room include Rachel Jackson. Thank you, Chair. Rachel Jackson, Principal Officer for Licensing. Thank you. And our staff streaming the event. Erin? Oh, okay. So, we have Lauren Stammery homing producing the meeting, and Erin Clark. Erin Clark, yeah, Clark for the meeting today. Thank you, Chair. Thank you very much. And also online we have our legal advisor. Would you like to introduce yourself? Hello, my name's Felicity Gullsbury. I'm a new barrister who's just started as your Licensing Officer. Thank you. You're rather distant. I don't know whether your microphone is close enough to your mouth or something like that. Can you hear me now? That's better. Thank you. Thank you. Felicity Gullsbury, new Licensing Officer. Thank you very much. Sorry to have the sound of the sensitive compared to the team committee. Thank you very much. So, Members, do we have, does anybody have a declaration of interest with regard to this policy? So, we have the minutes of the previous meeting, which was a long time ago, 5th of October 2022. Members, there are some of us here who were there then. Does anybody want to confirm that they're happy with the accuracy of the minutes? I'll propose. Can I just ask for some clarification on the second paragraph of Section 3 of this? Yes. I just want to say that Members were provided with evidence that supported CCTV in vehicles, excluding Executive Ones, but the Principal Licensing Officer that there was no evidence to suggest a pressing need nor proportion to mandate CCTV in exempt vehicles. I just wasn't sure that quite made sense. The grammar isn't quite there, is it? Just for a record, was it that the Licensing Officer reported that there was no evidence to suggest a pressing need for exempt vehicles? Can I suggest that we, are you able to clarify what that was, Rachel? Yes, thank you, Chair. I think the work that's reported is suffice. Members were provided with evidence that supported CCTV in vehicles, excluding Executive, and I would actually prefer that to say Vehicles, but the Principal Licensing Officer reported that there was no evidence to suggest a pressing need nor proportion to mandate CCTV in exempt vehicles, according to the guidelines. We have to say Executive Vehicles, Executive Exempt Vehicles. Oh, because it's Executive Higher Vehicles are exempt from holding a displaying taxi plates, etc. So it's just a way we call them Executive Exempt. So it should insert Executive Exempt. Thank you very much, Chair. So for clarity, I'm going to read that through as I understand it then. First sentence is fine and then it goes. Members were provided with evidence that supported CCTV in vehicles, excluding Executive Vehicles, but the Principal Licensing Officer reported that there was no evidence to suggest a pressing need nor proportion to mandate CCTV in executive exempt vehicles. According to the guidelines set out from the Department of Transport. Are we happy with that? Good. Okay. Is there anything else? Councillor Reddrop? No, that was everything I had. I'd be happy to propose that we go through, that we approve these minutes. Absolutely. No, and I'm important to do it now because I don't want to hold it over again. So thank you very much for being so alert to that. Thank you. Okay. With that amendment, Members, are we happy to agree that those are an accurate record of meeting? Thank you very much. Okay. So we'll move on to the Licensing Act review of the statement of the licensing policy. So Rachel, would you be able to take us through that, please? Of course. Thank you, Chair. Good morning. Section 5 of the Licensing Act. Sorry, there's a feedback here. Is it going to be okay? Section 5 of the Licensing Act 2003 requires a licensing authority to determine and publish a statement of licensing policy at least once every five years. The policy must be published before it carries out any licensing functions under the Act. The current policy is effective until the 31st of January 2024, so it must now be republished. There are no proposed fundamental change to this policy, and it remains that there is no evidence to support implementing either a cumulative impact policy or an early morning restriction order. The proposed revisions are detailed at pages 5 and 6 of your papers. Yesterday evening, Councillor Redder had kindly emailed and highlighted some errors and anomalies in the draft policy, which I shall address if I may chair. Thank you. On page 13 of your Bender papers, paragraph 1.11 should have been deleted. That is obsolete, and it should have actually been deleted from the current policy. So 1.11 is deleted. Direct, thank you, Jen. The next paragraph, paragraph 1.12, the final sentence on the fifth line down, which starts a full equality impact assessment. This part should have been deleted from the current policy again as it is obsolete and has been addressed. Can we confirm it has been addressed? That final sentence is deleted. Interestingly, I had put, I win. Okay, thank you. And then page 16, paragraph 5.1 on the fourth line down. After the word authority, it should be a comma as opposed to a full stop. Okay, thank you very much. Going then to page 24, this is paragraph 17.3. After the words immigration act 2016 should read and has reflected the requirements in its processes. So it's now past tense rather than it has all been completed. So and will reflect will be changed to and has reflected. Correct chair, thank you. And then at page 25, paragraph 20.4, this should read, where a standard 10, which is a temporary event notice, has been subject to representation. And then the sentence continues, the licensing authority must consider. The words was given should be replaced with has been subject to representation. That's correct chair, thank you. Finally, unfortunately, my error, there have been two errors on the email addresses. And of course, these will be rectified before the final policy. Sorry, before you go on from that. Of course, yes. In 21.2, the 123 fourth line down, there's a misspelling. The authority would wish operators to notify the licensing office of any intention is spelled with a T, not an S. Thank you. Chair, you get the bonus point. Thank you. No, I think Councillor Reddrop gets most of them. Councillor Reddrop, the brownie points. You get the bonus points. Okay. And there was one about email addresses. Right, I added an extra ENV to the environmental health email. That was on the complex page. So page 28. First of all, the Cambridge Social Services, unfortunately. I was getting a bit carried away with that. Unfortunately, my cut and pasting, so apologies. We have an extra, www.cambridgeshow.co.uk for Cambridge Social Services. And an extra ENV in environmental health. I think I must have too much coffee that day, so apologies for that. So the actual address is Env Health without a dot. Env is Env.Health at scams.co.uk, so that's great. Thank you, chair. So did anybody else have anything that they... Yes, I think. That's what we're going through. The very first page is the paper. It doesn't have a gender item for it. It doesn't have the date. Is that on purpose? It's not on purpose. To be honest with what happened was Councillor Wilson, I submitted the draft to Democratic Services for the date of the committee have been set. So I only picked up this morning, so thank you. So in the title of the paper, we're just licensing Act 2003 review, a statement of licensing policy. It's at the top. The report to licensing. Oh, I see. We've omitted the date on that, so it should be the 19th of October. Thank you. Sorry, I... Yes, that's fine. Right, are we all done with typos and things? Thank you, Jess. Sorry, do carry on then. That was the end of my introduction, so unless there are any questions of me, thank you. Okay. So, Members, I suggest then, so Rachel has kindly provided us with the policy, including the amendments that she has referred to, on page 6 of our papers. So there are some removals from policy of unnecessary things. There are some revisions to policy, as specified, and some additions to policy and some additions to annex A. Now, I think probably what might be a good idea is just to go through those one by one, don't you think? Unless you think there's another way of doing it. So, shall we just... It's obviously difficult to see where things have been removed, and I think with your permission, Members, I'll accept those as having been removed. I have got the old policy with me, but I think I'm going to accept the officer's view that those things are reasonably removed. Can we look at the... updating the live music exemptions, page 5 of the policy, page 14 of our agenda? So, can you just talk us through that? The whole principle of what music people can and can't play, when or not they're serving alcohol is always quite fun and game. So, do you want to just talk us through that? Of course, thank you. There's been quite a few trends in the live music acts, and it's quite hard to keep tabs on them all to be frank. Some, first of all, it relates to an amplified music. Now, basically the provisions are, if you are a licensed premises for a pub with a beer garden, which has not got co-stipulated on its licence for covering the beer garden, you are entitled to have live music regulated entertainment until 11pm Monday to Sunday without any conditions whatsoever being imposed on there. The only way that could be removed is if you get a representation or an objection from the public, we have a review and it comes to your committee. So, for example, we have an issue with noise and they want to apply to extend their operating hours, you can still not touch the live music act exemption there until 11pm. They can still do what they want, obviously noise, nuisance, controls, etc. But the only way to remove that exemption is via a formal review hearing. Lots of different permissions to enable smaller events. The idea, I think, was probably to have a play or a community event and festival going ahead. But basically, it would be small numbers. Small numbers of regulated entertainment. The rules always apply still where alcohol is sold, a temporary event notice is always required. So, in a nutshell chair, if the entertainment is going on after 11 o'clock or if the licence currently precludes the area, that would then require a licence. If, for example, a sports hall, which doesn't have the benefit of a premises licence, doesn't have the benefit of an alcohol licence, wishes to have a disco and an alcohol that would need a temporary event notice. Okay. So, can you just clarify for me if, obviously, in principle, most of these events continue quite happily and respect people's entitlement to a quiet life. So, the redress against this is if people raise a complaint, and if there are sufficient complaints, then that would trigger a review of the licence. Any other questions? Before the review. I mean, we see the review very much as a very, very final last resort, of course, because, of course, coming to your committee, the licence could be curtailed, could be removed, et cetera. So, where we receive any noise complaints, we'll work very closely with our environmental health office, it's the noise nuisance team. They will look at and see whether there's a substantiated complaint, we have noise monitoring teams, we'll go in there and monitor the noise nuisance. If we cannot reach and compromise with the premises, often we can, most people are quite reasonable to protect their business and, you know, work in harmony with the local humanity. If not, then, of course, environmental health, put noise abatement nuisance notices to the premises, and, of course, they themselves could apply for a review. The only reason I ask that is actually taking the records required to provide the evidence to that there is a noise nuisance is quite onerous on the residents. It takes quite a long time. They have to have experienced disturbance late at night for some time in order to keep the sufficient diary records to provide the evidence. But, so, they can raise an issue straight away with officers, an office, if they feel it's substantiated, then they can go in and investigate and discuss. It's only if nothing comes out of that discussion that we then go on to a panel hearing. Members, does anybody else want to ask any questions about that? You're happy with that. Okay, then. Thank you very much, Rachel. So, the next element was the revision at element 5, paragraph 5 on page 16, which was the cumulative impact. In fact, I had a query here just before we go into the detail. Could I just clarify what is meant by the first sentence, which says, so hang on, let's just start off, the cumulative impact is, it works on the principle that premises licence should reasonably be granted unless there's a reason not to, but one of the reasons not to might be the cumulative impact of a number of licence premises in a particular area or a number of places with the same kind of hot food licence or something like that. So, then it goes on. The term cumulative impact should not be mistaken with need, which relates more specifically to the commercial demand for a particular type of premises, i.e. a pub or hotel. Now, I'm not entirely sure what that sentence is driving at. I think it might possibly relate to the fact that it might mean the term cumulative impact should not be confounded by a perception of need, because we're talking at the two sides of the argument here, aren't we? We've got the premises people saying, we need another take away, and so I should be entitled to have the licence that I'm applying for, but the residents are saying that there's 13 of them. So, I don't know what mistaken with means, and I just wondered, can you just explain what that means? 25 premises on a high street, which are not causing public nuisance, because they may have, say, staggered closing times rather, so we don't have a mass bottleneck of people leaving the premises at one particular time. It is possible for a high street to have multitude of premises and not have a negative impact on the cumulative impact, the whole disturbance, the whole bottleneck, and say that the mass exodus of people leaving the chair. That's what they're saying, so the suggestion is here, which, again, this is actually a historic comment, and it's more of a statement to say, need, the argument of, I have to justify this, I want another take away here, is there a need for this? That is actually under the development control, it's saying it's not a licensing matter, but it's saying that the planning consent, the approval, the high street planning teams, it's their project that would look at, is there a need for this? So it's actually, it's an interesting historic comment in here. So it's not really need, is it? It's planning justification. Business, yes. Yes, so that's correct. So are we saying that they're saying that the issue of need is a matter to be dealt with by development control, and this is the argument, yes, there's a reasonable case for having three different types of, that's right, there's their take away, or three different hubs on the same, but I don't think mistaken with works there, so it might mean the term cumulative impact, because it's the opposite side of the argument, so it can't be, do you see what I mean? So I'm thinking, does it mean the term cumulative impact should not be confused with, or not, the argument that there is a cumulative impact on the environment should not be considered here, because that's a planning matter. Can I suggest we go away with this particular paragraph and come back? Are we allowed to do that, legal? Chairman, may I suggest that we do delegated authority to yourself to resolve this issue and not be the... Thank you very much, yes. I don't know if I've got a second of that. Great, okay, so I'll thrash this out with Rachel, and we'll get some wording with legal to understand what the function of this distinction is. Thank you. Okay, so then you've just... I see it because I've highlighted it, but at number six you said there are currently no early morning restriction orders in operation in any area of Southgate each year, okay? Right, good. So you can buy a beer whenever you like. Right, so then we move on to just moving on before we go any further to item 10 under enforcement. At 10.1 it talks about licensing law doesn't control the nuisance that might be caused outside the premises unless they're selling alcohol for off sales. But halfway down the paragraph it says these protocols will provide a targeting for known problem premises and high risk premises, as well as potentially problematic individual licensed events. In line with Council's enforcement policy, a lighter touch approach will be adopted for low risk premises and those which are well run. My question was rather out into the ether how would we know, I guess it's because we wouldn't be getting any complaints about them. Is that the general gist of that? I'd say yes, to be honest with you. We get reporting via say our nuisance portal on the website or the police and tell. We work very closely with the police licensing officer. So we know if there's known events we get a history of calls to ex-premises and then the police and I are the police of one of our team. We'll go and visit those premises as you've seen I think a couple of recent emails regarding a closure for example of a club premises. So where it's been disturbed as reported we'll work with them to address the issues. And for larger scale events, I'm sure Apologies is already all aware of this, but for events such as the Halloween festival coming up at the holiday end we have safety advisory group meetings which are interagency bodies as well. So then we'd look at addressing the potential crime disorder and then safety arrangements for that policing arrangements, monitoring and security. So there's kind of, it is, sometimes we know in advance where there will be an issue. As I say, strawberries and cream are big festivals such as that. And smaller premises or social clubs or whatever that might have had a birthday party that went a bit out of hand. There were more people than expected. Then the following month they have another one. That's how we look at that lower level intervention required. But it's still just as important because it's impacting the local residents so that negating the licensing objectives is about when the information will come forward. Okay. And of course enforcement happens when people are experiencing a disturbance. So if you're not getting any reports of disturbance then that should be okay. Right. So then we've got the new paragraph at paragraph 13 on page 21, the drink spiking prevention and tackling sexual harassment. Are these paragraphs that are recommended from other national documents? Or how has the wording been drawn up? This wording came from... Apologies, chair. This wording did come after a discussion with our Peterborough domestic abuse and sexual violence partnership. Okay. I am aware of Asperangela and what that contains and different things I got. Could we have an example put in the back please just to people to know? Where would you suggest? Well, if you look at paragraph 13.2 it says they're promoting Askperangela. Where are you suggesting that? Just put it in the appendices. Just saying what that is for people to be aware of. That's all I'm asking. Members, it's that anybody can go to Barstaff and say, please can I speak to Angela? And the Barstaff are on to understand that that means please can you get me a taxi home? On some of them there's different stages. Askperangela, I just need to be escorted out of the building or whatever. So if you could just do that please, thank you. So an explanation in an appendix. Councillor Howells, would a link to the Askperangela? I'd be fine with a link here, no problems at all. Because I think there is an Askperangela website or something like that. But yes, that's helpful. And yes, it does take more than one foot. I might just please, please would you put me somewhere safe for a few minutes. And in fact, only in yesterday's paper there was a report of a young woman who believed her drink, she had been, not her drink had been spiked but that she had actually been injected. Somebody brushed into her in a club and she suddenly felt ill afterwards. And when she looked there was evidence of a needle injection in her thigh which had been done when this person bumped into her. So all very worrying. Right, okay. Moving on then, the next section that's new is under large scale events and festivals. And it's at 1513 on page 22 about organisers of large events. Sorry, 1513. Sorry, thank you. So Rachel, do you want to take us through this? Again, Chair, this following the... Sorry, did cancer... I realised you had your hand up as well. It was really been addressed. Okay, thank you. Sorry, Rachel. Do you carry on? Thank you, Chair. This was just following discussions with... Again, it came from the domestic violence team looking at how can we make reference to the more high-risk festivals and events. So this was a kind of combination of discussion between that team and our environmental health officers. Direct lift from what has been requested then. Yes, and this ties in a bit, doesn't it, Councillor Howell, with the Ask for Anger as well in having a safe place to take customers if they require it. Right. The next element is 15.8 and I had a question here. So this is the addition of where considered necessary and where resources allow, where our environmental health team will look to monitor certain large-scale outdoor events to ensure compliance with noise-related licence conditions in relation to the prevention of public nuisance. Now, I wanted to understand what is meant by look to and certain because I am not sure whether that means we will undertake to always go to a proportion or we will do it as a discretionary thing or it depends how big it is. Do members feel it will be helpful to have that wording clarified? Oh, sorry, it's 15.8 on page 23. It's a new paragraph in and it says the team will look to monitor certain large-scale outdoor events. Now, I wonder whether we might have a principle that we always have a presence over a particular number of people or we undertake to monitor a proportion of them or always have a presence there if it was over. How do we plan? Sorry, Chancellor Wilson. Thank you, Chancellor Wilson. I was wondering whether it would be where there have been prior objections to a particular event as well. It can be. Thank you, Chancellor Wilson and Chair. This again was a quote from my colleague in front of the principal officer in response to the noise nuisance. We cannot guarantee as a council that we can attend every single large-scale event. It really does rely on what the event is in question. You're quite right to say, Councillor Wilson, previous events that have taken place, previous noise disturbances and where the Safety Advisor group is actually necessary and appropriate. So, for example, the zombie fest coming up at the Holiday Inn, we will have noise officers and environmental health officers at the venue. And sometimes it's been decided that a big event may just need advice of environmental health officers before the event. Sometimes that's quite difficult because it's only as good as when you're there. But it's just purely because of where resources are like. They will take an assessment and it will go through their head of service to confirm whether or not it's appropriate and necessary and available to have resources there to attend those events. Okay, so it's the wording I don't like. Yes, Councillor Howell. Just a very quick question. Apart from children, how many big events are over 5,000 do we have? We have the rock festival going ahead. That was going to be, I think under 5,000 at this time anyway. So we say we've got strawberry cream. We have the zombie fest which is about 3,000 proposed at the Holiday Inn site. So, not huge, but I suppose it depends on when and where and not necessarily large scale. I mean, for me, large scale. I would respect Councillor Howell saying that's over 4.99 rather than a Gloucesterbury type event. So 4.99, so being the number permitted for a temporary event notice. So it could be anything over that. So it could be 1,000 people we had, for example. An incident which was kind of classed as a rave at someone's back garden over 500 people for that. Absolutely, that was actually 499. But that caused a nuisance. The size of it doesn't necessarily impact on the location is more of a concern. 4 or 5 of those sorts of events a year. Councillor Howell, are you considering whether we should... I'm wondering whether we should undertake to attend those events with respect depending on the past history of them. I'm not sure whether Felicity can support my comment on here, but I don't think there should really be a matter for to direct or to determine that environmental health officers will attend, because then of course we'd be looking at breaching our own licensing policy. I was just suggesting a wording that said, because Look 2 is not a phrase that means consider. So I would like to suggest perhaps we'll consider monitoring events depending on the nature of it. Do you see what I mean? Look 2 is not a sensible bit of grammar in there. So I would suggest we'll consider monitoring some... Sorry, yes. Councillor Wilson. I think the wider at the end in relation to the prevention of public nuisance actually gives the boundaries of when that should happen. So that gives some assurance. So would you be happy if we put we'll consider monitoring or we'll... Chairman, I have no problems with consider at all, but one of the things I would like to know is I don't think today is the time for it is what happens when the person is there and what can they actually do at any one particular time. So it would be interesting for us to know have you got the authority then to shut down the whole event or do you turn the music volume down or what is the purpose of the person wandering around because they are going to be a very isolated person or individual or team if they decide to close the whole event down and there's 5,000 people there. So it would be interesting to know what is going to be their purpose once said. Because I know we have Hamilton Health officers at strawberries and cream in the past. I know officers have attended in order to see what was going on. I don't think strawberries and cream is going to be as difficult as maybe a race. It's much better now. Indeed, we had the example of the large event at near Linton that in fact was remarkably civilised. Whereas in fact the one where they hadn't had the safety advisory group visit had been causing people a lot of nuisance. So can we just Sorry, Councillor Redrup, you wanted to speak. I was just trying to suggest some wording to help Jaya, that was all. But then I was looking at it and it starts with where consider necessary and where resources allow so that is kind of controlling it before you get to the part of the sentence that you're thinking about. So then I was wondering about more of a rearrangement so it gets more complicated. But Ms Jackson was saying about performing an assessment to consider if attendance was appropriate. So I wondered if that kind of language would be helpful in this to actually put in more of the process that would take place so that for a large scale outdoor event environmental health will assess whether attendance is appropriate. Yes. And then look to attend if resources allow or something like that. We're getting some wording there. For a large scale outdoor event environmental health will assess the plans I'm not sure quite how it comes to the need or will assess the basically what you're trying to work out is whether it's likely to cause a public nuisance aren't we? So assess the likelihood of public nuisance and where considered necessary and where resources allow they will attend. Because that gives them a caveat that where resources allow if they haven't got the resources they won't and if they don't think it's necessary they won't. So have you captured that? Do you want to read that back Aaron? Yeah I think so chair. So I've got a statement to say that for a large scale outdoor event environmental health will assess the likelihood of a public nuisance occurring and then where necessary and where resources allow that was where I hadn't quite finished it off they will attend they will attend to ensure compliance with the noise-related licence conditions. Thank you chair. And what I will do chair as well just following councillor Howell has requested I will ask our BH practitioners to kind of give you an outline of what steps can be taken and I'll circulate that to you all. With your commission can I suggest we also bring this one back to the chair for final agreement on the wording? I'm happy with that. Is that okay? Thank you very much. Okay thank you Aaron. Right then moving on next paragraph 16 alcohol delivery services this is a new section I just wanted to take a straight to 16 for it's talking about this is the situation where people have ordered alcohol online or by phone and are getting it delivered to their home or to somewhere else or business premises and at 16 for it says there is also an expectation that business websites will make it clear that sales may not be fulfilled if appropriate ID is not provided and I think we should add in the words by the recipient because I might as an adult order 20 cans of lager and have it delivered to my home but if the only person at home to accept delivery of that is a child under 18 I'm not sure that's entirely acceptable so is that what is intended? That's absolutely correct yes thank you chair so we will include that but the idea is not provided by the recipient it's the person receiving the delivery whoever that is I think we should really say by the recipient because actually I mean you have to be over 18 to go on to a website to purchase the alcohol you then have to provide a statement say I'm over 18 the card the whole point is it's the delivery so if it sells delivery to a minor then that's what we're going to avoid if you're going to buy alcohol you have to be the person receiving it the age of 18 has to be in receipt of that so yes we will then as you requested the 16.4 you have to be careful because the recipient could be interpreted to mean the person who's paid the money and actually what I mean is the person on the door who's accepting the delivery I think that's very clear to say the recipient it is a person who is receiving that gets at the door for online delivery that is it so take away with a bottle of wine they would have to be over 18 when they're delivering the pizza and the bottle of wine thank you very much so do you want to take us through that at all okay just to come for them thank you chair that 16.4 will read their results so an expectation that business websites will make it clear that they will be not fulfilled if a probate ID is not provided by the recipient and that the terms and conditions of sales are robust thank you we're happy with that members great okay thank you right at 17.3 on page 24 you amended the wording in your update so that it says the council recognises the introduction of the Immigration Act 2016 that has reflected its requirements in its processes and then under 20 under open spaces we've now got 20 temporary event notices do you want to take us through that Rachel it's a revision sorry yes temporary event notices there was a revision here I think a revision only relates to Councillor Redder 20.4 where the words has been opposed oh sorry oh I do apologise this was the permitted hours so again with the temporary event notice regulations the number of events and the duration of an event has increased previous version of this the first paragraph was very long and it said a 10 may last for a maximum period of 168 hours it's a legislative requirement for 10 working days notice and blah blah blah but it looks like you've added that sorry not you but it has been suggested to add in because that element comes in at 20.2 so it looks like the revision is at 20.1 temporary event notices may be submitted to permit following licensable activities on a temporary basis whether they are within a premises or outside in an open space regulated entertainment plays, films, recorded music indoor sporting events live music boxing or wrestling entertainment and performance of dance late night refreshment provision of hot food and hot drinks between 11 and 5 sale by retail of alcohol supply on behalf of the club to a member etc so I think it's correct sorry to have a bit of clarity from there as well so the whole substance explains what they cover that's right just to make it clear any questions to their members okay can I just ask do we have any regulated sexual entertainment venues in the district I have a comment because it's in my head I don't think it's part of the review but under licensed reviews this reminds us that once we give a licence it goes with the premises it doesn't go with the people so sometimes a manager might leave and a new manager might take over and run a rather different exercise using the same licence but with a rather different character and that's when a review might become the way of reviewing the terms of that licence because it says it's a key protection for the community where problems associated with the licensing objectives are occurring after the grant or variation of a premises licence so that's where our residents get their opportunity to have their say and the other element was simply the in the body of the paper was simply the corrections of the email addresses wasn't it so then should we move on to annex A any comment about this ah here we are yes I had one so this do you want to take us through this the pool of conditions as well because I think we asked for this didn't we this pool of conditions has been around since the first policy came and I would imagine so there's nothing new here apart from the additions as we see to add a subsection in annex A section 4.4 which was on page 34 4.4 4.4 so that's large scale events yes great that's right so it gives us and this is largely to do with noise isn't it absolutely so again from our acoustic team our noise professionals requesting that commenting then right so just before we go on from that can we go back to 2.8 city tv and I thought so it talks about the presence of city tv cameras can be an important means of deterring and detecting crime immediately outside license premises conditions may include the need to have city tv cameras on the premises precise positioning of each camera the requirement to maintain cameras in good working order and the requirement to retain recordings for an appropriate period but should we not also have unless it comes under a different aspect you know the requirement to inform the public that they might they are being filmed or does that come under different that would be the information commissioners office so we have city tv in a public place or private place you have to register with them and have information and it's part of their enforcement it's not part of that that's correct any other questions members on annex A annex A okay yes Councillor Wilson it's the definition of large scale events I know that we've got events that are over 5,000 people but in our village we have an event every two years which goes over two or three days where the whole village could be attending at any one time but they probably don't but to me that seems to be like quite a large scale event as well because there's several activities going on at the same time structure, the licensing gap we've talked about tens of thousands of people so again like a Glastonbury kind of level 80-100,000 people but it would really depend on obviously we are very different we're not a city centre hosting big festivals and what have you so for us a large event could be just a little one person more than a temporary event notice 500 people 500 people in the village are very small community could be deemed quite right as a large event because of the impact it may have on others so we take the pragmatic approach with regard to that so I mean the large scale typically would be you're looking at the thousands of people but you just say if you're looking at 500 and one people over seven days that's a lot of thought for so it would depend on the nature and again the advisory group would look at why we would need to put any additional mechanisms in there this element about the large scale events is is dealing largely with noise but also with waste management and the point there is that when it's large you need to entertain all your people so it's loud in order that they can all hear whereas perhaps at the cotton feast it's not quite so noisy but maybe it is and you know so it doesn't relate to the total number of people attending over three days does it but also cotton also always attends a safety advisory group meeting doesn't it I actually for several years did the help and safety for the event so I used to come to the safety advisory group producer control document for the health and safety so and I used the purple book I was advised to use the purple book so it is quite a big event in terms of the number of people who could be attending but not all at the same time as it's in dribs and drabs over two or three days so I think the answer is there is no strict definition of what a large scale event is because it rather depends what's going on at the event doesn't it but it is loosely related to the number of people attending at one time so the question is are we happy that we don't have a definition and that we rely on the licensing officers to decide whether something is large scale or not yes? right so moving on towards the just one question here on appendix sorry appendix B gives us the table of delegations where people can make decisions according to what is being asked for doesn't anybody have any object concerns about that? okay and annex C relates to the procedure to be followed when dealing with an opposed club premises licensing application and I just wanted to ask I'm just thinking in terms of planning we often hear the objectors first and then the applicant afterwards I think in this case given that it's the objectors who've prompted the review I think it's appropriate that at number six the applicant explains what they're up to how their license is being delivered and how they run their business and then the objectors have the opportunity to put their questions and then it's the objectors' representations so I just wanted to check members are you happy with that running order it works in our experience I think it works right okay so I'm happy with those amendments that we've suggested so this is a recommendation that the licensing committee recommend to the council the adoption of the statement of licensing policy under the licensing act 2003 for a period of up to five years the only other thing I wanted to ask you members is whether you feel it would be useful to see the track changes version go to full council I would have liked to see the track changes version to this committee because I think it sets it in context you can see what's been removed what's being amended and you can understand what changes are so in future I've asked Rachel if she would kindly bring a track changes version to us but having gone through it I'm wondering whether you would like to have a track changes version to go to council or would you just like the version that we have here to go to council Chairman I think that we have in the track changes is good I don't think it would be good to extend people to track changes to council because that opens up a whole can of worms and people start discussing things again however it wouldn't be if they want to have a link to that maybe that could be put into the report a link to track changes if you want to but personally no I think they should just be giving the fate of company an asset I'm happy with that in a way because I think we've done the work to be sure that we're happy about it and in this case I think I'm happy to recommend that the version as with the amendments that we've suggested go as at page 9 onwards in our agenda papers go to council are you happy with that members I'm sure Rachel's going to bring us a track changes next time we have to review the policy okay members so if you're happy with that Rachel are you happy yet with everything you need to do so we have a couple of so 5.2 we will review the paragraphs that's obviously counter how it's suggested with yourself and with Felicity and 13.2 we'll have a link or some further detail regarding Asgandula and at 15.8 the wording of this but we'll finalise that again I'll finalise what Aaron has got with my colleagues in environmental health make sure they're happy and you can sign that off as well 16.4 by the recipient yes it has been under that and of course all the amendments to council record came up as well yes thank you can I just seek just to check with our legal advisor Felicity are you happy with all of that I am thank you chair thank you very much okay so with that members I'll close the meeting in that case okay thank you very much so it's 11.02 thank you very much for your attendance oh and Councillor Sanford sorry I didn't see you put your hand up at all but was there anything you would have liked to say no I'm fine thank you my non attendance in physical form this morning is due to having a covid booster late yesterday somewhat under the weather this morning so that's why I'm joining virtually okay well thank you very much and I hope you feel better soon okay thank you thank you right other members I'll close the meeting thank you