Agenda item

Report of the Director of Markets and Consumer Protection.

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Markets and Consumer Protection detailing the income collected from the Late Night Levy to date, and forecast to be collected over the next nine months, covering a total period of thirty months. The report also considers areas for future expenditure.

The Chairman reminded Members that they had requested this level of detail on the Late Night Levy income and expenditure at the last meeting of the Licensing Committee. The Licensing Manager reported that it was forecast that a total of £292,000 would have been collected and apportioned to the City Corporation by March 2017. Of this, £177,000 (£84,000 in 2015/16 and £93,000 in 2016/17) had been spent or was programmed to be spent by the end of March 2017, leaving a total of £115,000 unspent. The Licensing Manager went on to remind Members that funds collected from the Late Night Levy could only be spent in specific areas and had to be shown to benefit those premises open after midnight. 

The Committee were informed that final spend decisions would be taken by the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Licensing Committee alongside the Director of Markets and Consumer Protection. However, there were some suggestions for future expenditure within the report for discussion.

A Member expressed concern that questions he had posed on the Late Night Levy at previous meetings of the Licensing Committee had not been answered. He referred to the formula for Levy reduction featured within the legislation and guidance for the Levy. He added that he had expected to see this referred to within a written report alongside Officer's views on what the City Corporation could and could not do around this. Other Members questioned whether the formula was directory or mandatory. Another Member questioned whether those premises that were open beyond midnight for only five nights per week could be charged proportionately (e.g. 5/7 of the full Levy fee). The Licensing Manager reiterated that there was no flexibility around the amount charged under the Levy as this was nationally prescribed and based on the premises' rateable value. He added that, at present, the Levy had to apply across the whole of the Local Authority area although this was currently being looked into by the Home Office as was the number of premises who might be exempt from paying the Levy. The Licensing Manager went on to report that, as far as he was aware, any reduction in the Levy was only due to premises leaving or joining the scheme during the Levy year. The Licensing Manager stated that he was happy to clarify these points and provide Members with a fuller response on this matter. The Chairman added that, regardless of any discounts that may or may not be possible, the City's current underspend on Levy funds still stood. He clarified that any possible discounts would not be applied retrospectively. 

The Deputy Chairman added that the only discount available on the Levy was a 30% reduction for those who met the criteria of the Safety Thirst Scheme. She added that this seemed to be a good approach and encouraged licence holders to talk to and co-operate with the Licensing Team. 

With regard to possible future expenditure, Members stated that they were not convinced that there was a continuing need for taxi marshalling with the availability of services such as 'Uber' and the forthcoming introduction of the Late Night Tube. The suggestion of the City contributing Levy funds to part funding an Alcohol Recovery Centre was widely supported by the Committee. Members were of the view that Option 3 detailed in the report - funding 13 nights at £65,000 (Thursday and Friday every week in the month leading up to Christmas and New Year, except in the final week before Christmas where this would be available every weekday).

Members went on to discuss the possibility of funding some of the projects planned by 'Club Soda' following a presentation to the Licensing Committee at its last meeting. Some Members sought reassurance as to whether Levy funds could legitimately be spent on this project. Some Members felt that this was worth exploring. Other Members stated that they were not convinced that using Levy funds to promote Club Soda would be appropriate. Instead, it was suggested that Officers might consider how to promote and engage with the project in other ways and where funding for this might be drawn from. However a number of members expressed support for the scheme but sought more details of how any funds would be spent and that any such support would be allowable expenditure under the Levy rules.  

A Member reported that, at recent City residents' meetings, many had voiced concerns about street cleansing in the aftermath of late night drinking. He therefore questioned if additional funding could be given to cleansing to extend the scope of the existing scheme.

The Deputy Chairman supported this suggestion. She reported that, at present Levy funding was only used for street cleansing from Thursday-Sunday each week. There would be merit in looking to extend this and requesting proposals from the Cleansing Team as to what more could be done and at what cost. Members delegated authority to the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Licensing Committee alongside the Director of Markets and Consumer Protection to ascertain the details of any possible future expenditure in this area before committing to this.

The Deputy Chairman went on to suggest that funding for Club/Promoted Events training in an attempt to introduce a benchmark or suitable qualification might be considered.

A Member commented that, if the City Corporation were having difficulties spending their share of the Levy funds, consideration could be given to increasing the 70% of funds currently apportioned to the City of London Police as this was only the minimum recommended amount.   

The Deputy Chairman went on to state that the Committee would welcome clarity from the City of London Police as to how their portion of the Levy funds were being spent and the governance process around this - how much influence did Licensing Police Officers have over where the money was spent for example? The Chairman requested a written report setting out this information to the next meeting of the Licensing Committee. The City of London Police agreed to produce this report. In light of such a report, the Committee might look to increase the portion of the Levy funds attributed to the City of London Police going forward.

The Licensing Manager reported that, if the percentage of Levy funds currently attributed to the City of London Police were to be increased, this would require a change to the current Policy and would also need to be the subject of public consultation.

In response to final questions, the Licensing Manager reported that no Levy funds were currently being spent on taxi marshalling and that no funds were being contributed to the running of the Safety Thirst Award Scheme at present.

The Chamberlain confirmed that the current surplus in levy funds had been accumulated over a two and a half year period. Assuming that the Committee agreed to continue to fund all that they were currently funding, the ongoing surplus would amount to approximately £33,000.

RESOLVED: That Members:

1.     State their preferences as to how they would like the Levy money to be spent as follows: Additional funding for street cleansing (subject to the Chairman and Deputy Chairman alongside the Director of Markets and Consumer Protection ascertaining the amount of additional funding required for this) and funding for the 'Club Soda' project if this were deemed suitable for Levy funding;

2.     State that they would like to support 'Option Three' for funding the Alcohol Recovery Centre (ARC) for 13 nights at £65,000 (Thursday and Friday every week in the month leading up to Christmas and New Year, except in the final week before Christmas where this would be available every weekday).

3.     Agree to delegate authority to the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Licensing Committee and the Director of Markets and Consumer Protection in consultation with the Town Clerk to finalise decisions around any future Levy spending.