Issue - meetings

There was one item.

Brexit

The Interim Director of Consumer Protection and Market Operations advised Members that he attended a Chief Officers meeting of the Town Clerk to discuss the risks of a no-deal Brexit and confirmed that to date there were no specific risks that affected licensing. The Comptroller & City Solicitor confirmed that no impacts had been identified as UK licensing legislation was not EU based. Members were advised that if any risks were identified they would be brought to the Committee.   

The Chairman raised one item that he considered urgent.

Licensing Inspector Review

The Committee received a report of the City of London Police regarding the Licensing Inspector Review. The following comments were made:

·         Members were advised that the role of the Licensing Inspector within the City of London Police was removed as part of the Transform Programme of Change and in line with the force’s determination to realign itself to nationally recommended rank-ratio distribution. Currently the force is a significant outlier in terms of a high number of inspectors compared to sergeants.

·         The responsibilities of the Licensing Inspector have therefore been passed to the Communities’ Inspector for them to carry out in addition to their existing responsibilities. Due to issues arising from the lack of direct management of the team and no direct single point of contact for managers within the Corporation to have direct and timely liaison with in the Licensing offices at Walbrook Wharf, it was recommended that the Licensing Inspector post be reinstated, and endorsement given for the post to be funded via the Late Night Levy.

·         It was noted that this recommendation would put pressure on the Levy but the Licensing Inspector post would deliver even more for the investment. It was agreed that context was needed regarding providing details of what the Levy is being used for, what could be lost and what surplus was available. It was noted that licensing only covered 30% of the Levy whereas the Police covered 70%. 

·         A Member queried if there were sufficient funds available and what would be lost if the monies were spent to fund this post.

·         In response to a query regarding the post being an Inspector rather than a Surgent, members were advised that being an Inspector gave rank and was a fixed salary