Clause 27
Policing and Crime Bill
9:00 am
James Brokenshire (Shadow Minister, Home Affairs; Hornchurch, Conservative)
Thank you, Sir Nicholas. I reciprocate by offering you the best wishes of the Committee for a restful and recuperative recess next week.
Clause 27 amends section 147A of the Licensing Act 2003 relating to the offence of persistently selling alcohol to children. That section states:
“A person is guilty of an offence if...on 3 or more different occasions within a period of 3 consecutive months alcohol is unlawfully sold on the same premises to an individual aged under 18”.
That is punishable by a fine of up to £10,000 or, as an alternative remedy, an immediate closure notice can be sought under section 169A of the 2003 Act for a period of up to 48 hours.
Section 147A was inserted into the 2003 Act by the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 and has been in force for only about 18 months. Indeed, the provision is so new that data on prosecutions will not be available until this autumn, so we have no real feel for how widely used the power is before the change proposed in this Bill to reduce the qualification for persistence from three to two occasions.
The position is clouded further, as the Association of Convenience Stores notes in its submission to the Committee. It states:
“There is no evidence that the current offence is not effective and”—
this is interesting—
“the Home Office Toolkit cautions against using this power, suggesting enforcement authorities should instead pursue a review of the licence.”
I should be grateful if the Minister clarified whether the toolkit states what the ACS says, because clearly that is a relevant factor in our consideration of the clause, which changes a previous provision. If it does say that, I should be grateful to know why it does and whether, in the light of the change in the Bill, the Minister is considering a change in the language in the toolkit, given that it seems to suggest that enforcement authorities take a different route, a different option, from the power envisaged under section 147A.
As I said, the provision has been in force for a relatively short time. We have no specific data on it; we seem to have no prosecution data at the moment, as it is too new. However, from the frequent discussions that he has with the police and other law enforcement agencies, can the Minister say what the experience of using this power has been on the ground to explain why this change is proposed? The change implies that the provision is not working in some way, that something has changed or that the Government believe that a different emphasis is required.
Will the Minister give some background on the thinking behind this decision? Given that we are talking about only 18 months, is the change to section 147A an admission that the Government were wrong in the first place and that they should have gone for two rather than three occasions when the power was introduced? This rapid change of heart is re-emphasised on considering that the change in approach reflected in the clause was first telegraphed in June last year in the “Youth Alcohol Action Plan”, just a year after the power was brought into effect. Will he explain why “persistent” was taken to mean three occasions when the offence was introduced and what evidence there is to necessitate the change? If not, will he confirm that a mistake was made in the Government’s thinking when the power was introduced?
I want it to be made clear that this provision will operate equally for all licensees. I am sure that the Minister will confirm that it is intended that the provision be applied to small shops and huge hypermarkets equally. All premises should be treated the same in triggering the two occasions required for persistence. The Bill makes that clear but I want to clarify whether the Home Office envisages giving further guidance or clarification on enforcement. That is an important point. The provision will put greater pressure on larger retailers in ensuring that their systems and procedures are in place, simply because of the volume and nature of their sales. The number of transactions that go through their tills will mean a large number of potential under-age sales may be attempted at their premises. It would be helpful to clarify whether the Home Office, ACPO or any other agency proposes to issue guidance on enforcement when the provision is introduced. If so, what does the Minister expect the guidance to say?