Licensing Act Committee - Tuesday 16 June 2026, 7:00pm - Folkestone & Hythe webcasting

Licensing Act Committee
Tuesday, 16th June 2026 at 7:00pm 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 

Welcome to Folkestone and Hythe District Council's Webcast Player.

 

UPDATE - PLEASE NOTE, MEETINGS OF THE JOINT TRANSPORTATION BOARD AND FOLKESTONE AND HYTHE DISTRICT AND PARISH COUNCILS' JOINT COMMITTEE WILL BE STREAMED LIVE TO YOUTUBE AT: bit.ly/YouTubeMeetings. 


The webcast should start automatically for you, and you can jump to specific points of interest within the meeting by selecting the agenda point or the speaker that you are interested in, simply by clicking the tabs above this message. You can also view any presentations used in the meeting by clicking the presentations tab. We hope you find the webcast interesting and informative.

 

Please note, although officers can be heard when they are speaking at meetings, they will not be filmed.

 

At the conclusion of a meeting, the webcast can take time to 'archive'.  You will not be able to view the webcast until the archiving process is complete.  This is usually within 24 hours of the meeting.

An agenda has not been published for this meeting.

This meeting will be webcast live to the internet. For those who do not wish to be recorded or filmed, you will need to leave the chamber.
For members, officers and anyone else speaking at the meeting, it is important that the microphones are used so that viewers on the webcast and others in the room may hear you.
Would anyone with a mobile phone please switch it to silent as it can be distracting.
I would like to remind members that although we all have strong opinions on matters under
consideration it is important to treat members, officers and public speakers with respect.
So we will move on.
Do we have any apologies for absence please?
Thank you, Chair.
Yes, we have received apologies from Councillors Cooper and Polly Baitmore.
Thank you very much.
Councillors, do we have any declarations of interest on the Licencing Act before you?
I am seeing no declarations.
Councillors, you also have before you the minutes to consider and approve as a correct
record the minutes of the meeting held on the 24th of June 2025.
May I sign this as a correct record, please?
Thank you very much.
So we then go on to the statement of licencing policy, and I'm going to hand you over to Mr.
Rush to take us through this.
What you do need to look at is the very, very last, which is where it states that we
need to note and we give the planning officer delegatory rights to amend as necessary,
but we will come to that towards the end.
So if I may come to you.
Thank you, Chair, and good evening, members,
and thank you for pushing back your main meeting
so that we could fit this in.
The report in front of you is to deal with the new licencing policy.
The licencing policy has been renewed every five years
under the Licencing Act.
The proposed new draught has got some minor changes
to the existing policy,
but we are largely retaining the policy as is.
There's basically three reasons for this.
The first is that the first the policy that we're using
at the moment went through a comprehensive period of review
as part of the place plan when we when we when we last did this.
We found that the policies stood the test of time
for the last five years.
So for that basis we are pretty happy to continue with that policy.
But it's also worth saying that there's not been much change in legislation to necessitate a big overhaul.
And we probably do need to acknowledge that with LGR on the prospect that we shouldn't really be committing
ourselves to an extensive change of policy at this time should we had wished to do that.
So the policy is before you is largely unchanged, but we have identified in the report,
the changes that, the minor changes that have been made to the policy.
And the process ongoing is that we have to do a statutory consultation with statutory consultees.
But if you see the list which is within the report, you'll notice that it's very difficult to identify
some of the latter groups within that list. So we do a standard of public consultation.
This is very common with this type of policy and we're proposing for a period of eight weeks
to go out to public consultation,
take those views into account,
and then bring it back to this committee in October,
and then onto full council,
which is where it needs to be finally approved in November,
if anything goes to plan.
Leave it there for any questions.
Thank you very much.
Councillor Fuller.
Thank you, Chair.
I had a question about the data, first of all.
Just that I noticed that the number of licence premises
licence and club premises are all down, or certificates are all down, yet the number
of personal licences has gone up significantly. Is that a common trend or is that something
about the nature of licencing locally now? I'll let you answer that and then I'll go
on to my second one.
Hi, can you hear me? Oh yes, my light didn't come on. So yes, it's an interesting point.
So overall, the number of licenced premises has dipped
by about 6 % over the last three years.
And obviously the impact of COVID
and the economic climate, et cetera, has impacted us.
Not as much as I think other areas
who have seen a bigger drop overall.
But in terms of your question about personal,
it's very common.
There's quite a, there's a revolving door
of people with personal licences.
So a lot of people take it as a second or even a third job,
obviously working in pubs and restaurants.
So it's not uncommon.
It's probably indicative of the actual,
also the drop in the number of general premises,
as it were, is that it's quite hard to make ends meet.
Okay, my next question was obviously quite a lot
the bit about cumulative impact policies have been,
or assessments has been stripped out.
And I think there was a bit in it that said
we were gonna look into one in the previous version.
I assume we haven't done that.
Have we decided therefore that it's just not a good idea
to even look into these things?
And were we to want to look into a cumulative
impact assessment, who could kick,
you know, who could start that process off as it were
and even is it possible for the council
or would it have to be the licencing team that did that?
Thank you.
Question on community impact assessments.
First of all, should I just give a bit of background
to what that means?
Community impact assessment can be called by anybody,
but particularly would be the statutory consultees,
would have to give serious thought.
And it's basically to restrict the number of premises
the accumulation of premises in an area.
So the classic would be, say, the police would ask for
an assessment to be carried out of number of nightclubs
in a certain area because everyone's spilling out
at the same time.
But I've also seen assessments done for number of off
licences where public health have requested,
public health requested a review because of problems
of alcohol.
So in the last policy, we did talk about doing a review.
We did a sort of paper -based review,
but didn't really sort of think
that there was sufficient evidence to start a full review.
In this version of the policy,
we've actually put more process in about how review,
because the actual previous policy didn't really deal
with actually how the process would happen,
the review that would be necessary by this committee
and by council, because it's quite an important
political decision to be made.
So we've added in that sort of detail to the new policy.
I think it is an improvement on what we have got in there at present.
In terms of who can call review, anyone can call review.
If a review was requested by the SACHA consultees, that would have more impact because the police
came to you and said we need to review the situation.
Public health, you would have to think about it.
A review is quite a detailed process because you need to get an assessment completed that
can stand up to scrutiny from, because you can still, applications made, there's a perception
that if you have cumulative impact, so applications made simply sort of put to one side, they're
not, they're still heard, members still have their discretion to make a decision, it still
can go to the Magistrates. So it really is quite a detailed process. Have I answered
your questions, Councillor Holmes?
Just finally, obviously all the statutory consultees could initiate a review. Could
the council actually initiate the process of beginning a cumulative impact assessment
without a review having been called? So could, for example, a motion be put to council saying
we think we need to do this here and then licencing would do it or would it have to
come in via that channel, as it were?
I think if we had the evidence, that would be the thing.
Yes, we could probably initiate something, but it would be very much evidence -based,
and that's what we would need, the evidence of everything.
Yes, just to say yes, a Council motion could initiate.
You know, you could set up to the course, but then this Committee and then Council would still need to go back and approve the result.
Councillor Mike Blakemore.
Thank you, Chair. I was going to ask exactly the same question about the number of licences,
because it's a bit surprised at the number of premises licences falling, because they
obviously include shops, and I think the perception of most people would be the number of convenience
stores selling alcohol have gone up. So would it be a fair assumption that that has made
up for a loss in the number of other licenced premises of bars and clubs and things? So
We've seen an increase in number of shops that have fallen now, but none of them are
licenced premises, in other words.
Most of our premises are licenced.
Yes, it sits with restaurants, not necessarily bars as such, shops, lots of corner shops,
and anybody.
It doesn't just cover, obviously, the sale of alcohol, but regulated entertainment and
late night refreshment.
So there are places that want to open up after 11 o 'clock and serve food, but not necessarily
alcohol or want to show films for example and that's regulated entertainment. So there's a real mix
of places which is great for diversity actually. We do have quite a mixed licenced landscape across
Folkestone unlike other areas. So Canterbury example is a obviously university town so it's
geared up to students over there. Our landscape is actually quite different. I think it is
a bit more diverse. That is certainly what the numbers tell us.
I have one other question for May. You mentioned diversity. I noticed we have deleted our council
commitments on equality and diversity. I just wondered why that was. It is at the longhand
President Trump getting rid of some A .G .I.
No, that's all.
So because this is a statutory provision,
we are required by the Licencing Act
to have a policy in place.
And basically the policy describes how we deliver
our statutory role under the Licencing Act.
So in terms of, you raised an interesting question
about diversity because of the statutory requirement.
It doesn't negate consideration of diversity.
That is included in the consideration of the policy,
if that makes sense.
So that's why it's been not because of any other reason.
Absolutely not.
So I hope that answers your question.
Yeah, it was in there before.
Now it's not.
So I was just interested in why it was included in the previous iteration, but we've now decided not to include it.
It's about it.
Councillor Bailão, it is included within the policy, it's just that we had a bit of repetition in there.
So it's simple as that, as Nick was saying.
It has to be included within the main bulk of the policy, but we had a sort of section that seemed to sort of highlight it as well, so.
Thank you. Councillor Lockwood. Thank you, Chair. A couple of questions. Firstly, on
LGR, that's very sensible not to, well, to consider what's happening next year and beyond.
I just wonder, in terms of our policy and our neighbours' policies, whether theirs have
looked at as part of this and whether I appreciate alignment won't happen until after the new
councils are formed, but I just wonder if half and I have been cast across neighbouring
councils policies just to look for glaring differences, as it were. And if not, obviously
during the consultation period we'll find out what the models are so you'll know exactly
which neighbours we're talking about come middle of July,
so that might be worth looking at.
And secondly, around events.
And I know we are a very culturally diverse, busy town,
lots of music and art and events going on.
And I think well -organised and planned events
all go through this council smoothly as far as I know.
People are happy with that.
I just think last minute things are always difficult
and a lot of frustration comes from things beyond
this council's control, i .e. legislation,
which we have to stick to.
But I would just urge that we are mindful,
we're in a very culturally diverse town
and that the events team should,
where possible support our local economy
and cultural creators in that respect.
So, I would urge that and look at our neighbours models
in LGR if that's okay.
I agree we will look at our neighbours models
once we know who our neighbours are.
The core of the policy is obviously based
around the licencing act.
So there will be absolutely core similarities
between many of the policies we have.
But yes, you make a good point that once our neighbours
are known that we'll be doing this part of the process.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Councillor Thomas.
Yeah, thank you, Chair.
Just in relation to 4 .6, takeaway food premises,
nationally, there's been, there's a growing campaign
associated with putting more effort into making sure that these premises don't
provide people who have a high alcohol dependence from getting alcohol only
from takeaway food premises. So if you go to any bar,
then the responsible operator of the premises will make sure
that if somebody is drinking too much then they'll stop them and then they'll
remove them. There doesn't have to be anything like that. And I know it might be an issue
that might need to be dealt with at a higher level, but is there anything that we can put
in our policy that will protect those vulnerable people who have an alcohol dependence, and
there's been deaths associated with this within the last year, and there's been identified
nationally as well. Is there anything that we can do to protect those vulnerable people
from having alcohol delivered on a regular basis
with no controls over whatsoever.
It's not the kind of thing that would happen
in a responsibly operated bar.
I take it you're talking about Deliveroo and Justeep.
So they do have their own policies in place
because we have had issues, we've had complaints before,
and we've had to reach out to the companies
for them to look at their own policies and whether they're following.
But we can't control their staff that are delivering the food and the alcohol.
It's up to those staff to determine whether they hand over.
And unfortunately, they probably just are just handing over and moving on.
But it's difficult, but it's something, it's out of our control with the delivery companies.
So, I mean, there is anything in here that we could use to prompt them or to prompt the
panel if there's an objection to a licence that ends up going to a panel to prompt the
panel to ask about how some of those things will be managed.
Because Deliveroo and all those other things operate from within existing premises, and
all of those premises are licenced by us.
So, you know, there has to be something somewhere,
there has to be a warning, there has to be, you know,
something which will flag this up
to the people that deliver or the others are going to,
to say, you know, a warning to protect
these vulnerable people who are,
I mean, they're out there in the ether, aren't they?
You know, they're difficult to identify,
but I'll accept all of that.
But, you know, surely there must be something we can do
to prompt that. Thank you.
I think we can probably act if we get continuous complaints about a specific premises.
Then we could take that on board, but without getting the complaints and then obviously gathering the evidence,
I don't think we can just put something general in there, you know, into the policy.
We would have to be reactive from complaints and...
Is that okay?
Thank you, Councillor Thomas, it's a very, very good point, but I don't believe that
our policy, because if someone orders from one and it starts flagging up, they can go
into another delivery service, there'd be no way of actually tracking it.
Councillor Fuller.
Sorry, I thought of another question when we were talking about sort of events run through
the Council.
Can a cumulative impact assessment take into account
temporary event notices?
And also following up from Paul's point,
the other thing to take into account
with these delivery services of course
is they're not all delivering from say,
a restaurant or whatever.
Now they're often delivering from supermarkets
and supermarkets are now operating their own
sort of whoosh or whatever they call it,
services and things like that.
So that's something that I'll let you consider, as it were.
But yeah, how would temporary event notices fit in an area
which had a cumulative impact assessment
that was looking to in some way control licence?
Could I get back to you on that, Councillor Fuller?
It's simply because I would not,
I don't think temporary event notice,
because it comes under,
I don't think that would form part
of a cumulative impact assessment,
because it's about premises.
but I will clarify that point specifically and get back to you on that.
Thank you. I'm not seeing any other Councillor asking a question or wanting clarification.
So, Committee, can I have a proposer, please, to receive and note the report and that it
be a draught statement, be published for public consultation for a period of eight weeks,
and also for us to authorise the Director of Housing Operations to approve any minor
amendments to the draught statement resulting from the consultation.
That will then be presented back to the Licencing Act Committee on 6 October and then on to
the full Council on 25 November for approval.
Can I have a proposer?
Thank you, Councillor Greatmore and Councillor Thomas.
All those in favour, please raise your hands.
and I can see that's unanimous. Thank you very much.
That is actually the end of the Licencing Act Committee
and very shortly after a five minute break
we will be going on to our Planning Committee.
So please take this chance to have a quick breath of fresh air should you need.
Thank you.