Agenda item

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 role, whereas a Surgent was open to overtime.

·         With regards to comments regarding non-licensing matters being covered by this post but being funded by the Levy, Members were advised that the Project Servitude Team was the appropriate resource for line management by the Inspector as counter terrorism covered the same footprint as licensed premises in the City and the joining of the teams would be an asset to licensing matters.

·         It was noted that the Committee had lobbied hard for the Inspector role to be reinstated and the Commander and Commissioner were thanked for listening to the concerns of the Committee. The Chairman clarified that the Police were seeking endorsement for this role and the Committee had no power over the appointment. It was noted that it was difficult to segregate uniform and non-uniform staff and funding this post would resolve the issues for the right purposes for all.

·         The Chairman noted that there was little to go on from other Local Authorities, but he was personally satisfied that the post would cover what the Committee needed and that the cost was justified. Members were supportive but requested additional information providing the full picture of how the Levy was used by the Corporation as a Licensing Authority and the Police.

·         Members were advised that the Annual Report they received from the Police provided a full breakdown on the Levy. It was also noted that an Officer Group had been set up which addressed Levy spend in more detail and could be reported to the Committee at a future meeting.  

RESOLVED – That Members endorse the funding of the Licensing Inspector post via the Late Night Levy.