Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord De Mauley (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 14 July 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill.


Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill

My Lords, as the noble Lord, Lord Stevenson, has explained, Amendment 305ZB seeks to ensure that the costs of social services and trading standards, in their role as ““responsible authorities”” only, can be covered by fees when they are located outside the licensing authority as well as within it. I certainly acknowledge that I said in Committee that I would reflect further on the proposal. I have done so very carefully and taken legal advice. Having examined it, I have found that the practical difficulties unfortunately outweigh the benefits. The role of responsible authority involves, for example, considering applications and, in rare cases, applying for review. The costs arising will be very marginal—I am sorry that my noble friend Lady Hamwee objects to the use of that wording—in the context of overall fee income and the wider functions of these bodies. To set fees locally, each licensing authority will be required to calculate its own costs. We would not wish to require it to calculate the costs of another body without very good reason. The amendment would also imply a duty on county councils to report fractional costs and on the licensing authority to pass the funds to the county. The cost of this would then be passed on to fee payers even if the net gain to local government was very little or even nothing. The current fees regime makes no provision for district councils to pass funding to county councils in respect of these functions and we understand that no money has been transferred. As I said, I have considered this matter carefully. In a nutshell, I am asking noble Lords to accept that the amendment would result in substantial extra bureaucracy and costs which would be passed on to licence holders for very little benefit. I ask the noble Lord to withdraw the amendment.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
729 c877-8 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Complaints Clubs Alcoholic drinks Anti-social behaviour Civil proceedings City of Westminster Fees and charges Greater London Drugs Exemptions Licensed premises Drunkenness Police Property transfer Parliament Square Protest Misuse Opening hours Private prosecutions Young people Reform Trespass Royal parks War crimes Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs Police and crime commissioners Night-time economy
Legislation
Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk