Venue: Council Chamber, Council Offices, The Burys, Godalming
Contact: Maureen Brown Democratic Services Officer
ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN
To elect a Chairman for this meeting of Licensing Sub-Committee.
Cllr Patricia Ellis was appointed Chairman for this meeting of Licensing Sub-Committee C.
DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS
To receive from Members declarations of interest in relation to any items included on the agenda for this meeting, in accordance with the Waverley Code of Local Government Conduct.
There were no interests declared under this heading.
PART I - RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COMMITTEE
There were no matters falling within this category.
PART II - MATTERS OF REPORT
The background papers relating to the following report items in Part II are as specified in the agenda for the Committee.
The purpose of the report is to enable the Sub?Committee to consider a Temporary Event Notice (TEN) where an objection has been made by Surrey Police. Only the Police and Environmental Health may object to a TEN on the grounds that the TEN would undermine any of the four Licensing Objectives.
It is recommended that the Temporary Event Notice for the ‘Plough Inn’, 74 West Street, Farnham, Surrey GU9 7EH be determined by the Sub-Committee in light of and having regard to the representations from the Police, after hearing from the parties involved, and provided that the objection is not withdrawn for any reason, or the matter resolved between the person giving the Notice (Mr Simon Collinson) and the Police before or during the meeting.
The Licensing Manager introduced the report and advised that the applicant was not present at the meeting to respond to questions. Surrey Police, as the Responsible Authority, was represented by Rab Carnie, Police Licensing Officer.
Surrey Police then made their representation. Surrey Police were objecting to the application on the following grounds: Crime and Disorder, Public Safety, the Prevention of Public Nuisance and the Protection of Children from Harm.
Surrey Police then gave details of three incidents that occurred in November 2015 that opposed the four Licensing Objectives.
The Sub-Committee asked questions of Surrey Police concerning the applicant’s knowledge of the difference between fake and real ID, staff training and their perception of the applicant with regard to his role as a DPS.
Surrey Police were concerned over the applicant’s lack of knowledge regarding fake IDs, the lack of training given to his staff and the ‘laid-back’ approach that he took to the running of the premises, especially his lack of attendance at Pub Watch meetings. Surrey Police had subsequently given the applicant a training pack regarding under-age drinking.
The Sub-Committee then WITHDREW at 10.20 am.
Following the Sub-Committee’s deliberation the meeting RESUMED at 11.00 am. The Council’s Solicitor had been asked to advise the Sub-Committee during their deliberation on the wording of their decision.
The Sub-Committee had carefully considered a Temporary Event Notice (TEN) given by the ‘premises user’ (Designated Premises Supervisor [DPS]) of The Plough where an objection had been made by Surrey Police on the grounds of all four of the licensing objectives.
The Sub-Committee heard uncontested evidence submitted by Surrey Police regarding incidences during November 2015 that conflicted with the Licensing Objectives relating to Crime & Disorder, Public Safety, the Prevention of Public Nuisance and the Protection of Children from Harm.
The Sub-Committee considered that there was sufficient substantiated evidence submitted by Surrey Police to justify serving a Counter Notice to prevent the event from going ahead.
The reasons for this were:
The Sub-Committee considered that from the information submitted from Surrey Police regarding previous events at the premises, the DPS had failed to uphold the Licensing Objectives in all four areas and the DPS had not convinced the Sub-Committee that there was a willingness to uphold them in the future. With the background of the events outlined by Surrey Police (which had not been disputed by the applicant), and the nature of the planned event (which was likely to attract under-age people), the Sub-Committee did not have confidence in the applicant to manage the event and were satisfied all four Licensing Objectives would be undermined if the event took place.