Mr Malcolm Moss (North East Cambridgeshire, Conservative)

I beg to move amendment No. 84, in

clause 11, page 6, line 33, after 'officer', insert

'or a panel of officers'.

Mr Roger Gale (North Thanet, Conservative)

With this it will be convenient to discuss amendment No. 85, in

clause 11, page 6, line 38, after 'officer', insert

'or a panel of officers'.

Mr Malcolm Moss (North East Cambridgeshire, Conservative)

The amendments are fairly simple and short. They are intended to ensure that the decisions of licensing panels will be taken by the panel as a whole and not, as the Bill could be interpreted, by a single officer of the council. The amendments are intended to protect a status quo already established by some authorities, where the decisions on certain opposed applications, such as those relating to licences for street trading and door supervisors, are made by a panel of officers and not by a single officer. The system has proved successful and should continue after the legislation is introduced.

Mr Mark Field (Cities of London & Westminster, Conservative)

I support my hon. Friend. Given the genuine lack of urgency in relation to licensing applications, it is sensible safeguard to give a panel of officers from the licensing authority, rather than an individual officer, a say with regard to any of the variations set out in subsection (4). I appreciate that if great urgency were required, for whatever reason, it might be sensible to put powers into the hands of a single, very senior officer. However, in the circumstances that we are discussing, and given the fact that we will be in somewhat uncharted waters in the next few years as the legislation is introduced, the

safeguard is sensible. That is the case not least because, under the new regime, there will be great concern, not only from residents, but from businesses that will be subject to the legislation.

I hope that the Minister will accept the fairly minor amendment, which is, none the less, an important safeguard. The Bill provides for a sub-committee of elected councillors within the licensing authority, so it seems only sensible that great authority should not be placed on the shoulders of one unelected officer of an authority.

Dr Kim Howells (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Culture, Media & Sport; Pontypridd, Labour)

The amendments explicitly provide for a licensing committee to delegate its functions to a panel of officers of the licensing authority, as well as to a sub-committee and an officer of the licensing authority. Under the Bill, any function that may be delegated to an officer can also be delegated to a panel of officers. The amendments are therefore unnecessary.

The amendments would have the effect of allowing a panel of officers to discharge those functions that, under subsection (4), may not be carried out by an officer of the licensing authority. In that respect, the amendments are also undesirable. The functions set out in subsection (4) represent those functions where, after representations have been made raising the public interest issues reflected in the licensing objectives, the licensing authority ceases to act in its administrative role and instead steps into a regulatory role.

The provisions of clause 11 aim to ensure flexibility. It is the intention that licensing committees should delegate to sub-committees and, where appropriate, to officers, the day-to-day applications and administration to allow decisions on applications to be made quickly. As paragraph 4.46 of the draft guidance made clear, licensing authorities will want to consider how to ensure the speedy, efficient and cost-effective handling of decisions and functions when deciding their approach to delegation.

The Bill already allows for delegation to panels of officers, where that is appropriate, and that may well be the approach that licensing authorities will wish to adopt under a system where the majority of cases should be dealt with administratively. Given that the Bill already permits the delegation of administrative functions to panels of licensing officers, I ask that the amendment be withdrawn.

Mr Malcolm Moss (North East Cambridgeshire, Conservative)

Before we finish—I said that the debate would be short—perhaps the Minister could remind the Committee where the Bill refers to delegation to a panel of officers. That would be helpful.

Dr Kim Howells (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Culture, Media & Sport; Pontypridd, Labour)

The—no, this note does not tell me. I shall come back to the hon. Gentleman on that.

Mr Malcolm Moss (North East Cambridgeshire, Conservative)

Yet again, it will be too late to do anything about the matter. The issue is not vital, but it would have been helpful to have the answer when the question was posed. The amendments were probing, and I am reasonably satisfied with the explanation given by the Minister, particularly with reference to subsection (4) and those functions that officers are not

delegated to deal with. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 11 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 12 ordered to stand part of the Bill.