October
| Published: 26th October 2008 21:49 |
LICENCES TO SELL ALCOHOL
Name & address supplied
I feel it necessary to raise public awareness of an ever-increasing trend to issue licences to sell alcohol to anybody who asks. This was brought to my attention one morning whilst queuing in my local ‘Post Office' in Petts Wood. The amount of alcohol - wine / spirits / beer / aIcopops - displayed on the shelves and in the fridges was definitely ‘in my face'.
It appears that the sale of alcohol is now a priority for small local businesses to make money at the expense of ongoing ill-health of alcohol related illnesses that threaten our young naive population. Everyone knows that alcohol / drug abuse is a major National Health issue in this country. To see support of this threatening disease openly displayed in a local ‘Post Office' is beyond belief and morally offensive.
Who is giving out these licenses and on what basis? It really is time that we, the public, start to ask questions why an already growing problem of alcohol consumption in this country is being promoted in this way: Who is responsible for issuing these licenses to sell alcohol in Post Offices and small local grocery stores, garage outlets, etc? And why are they being allowed to do this when this country is in such a critical state with gun crimes, alcohol and drug related dependencies, which cost thousands of pounds to the NHS each year and affect family lives and the lives of young adolescents and younger children?
Do other residents share my concerns? I am eagerly awaiting responses.
We forwarded this letter to Councillor Tony Owen, who is also Chairman of the General Purposes and Licensing Committee. Here is Councillor Owen's reply...
"Licences for the sale of alcohol are governed by the Licensing Act 2003. Anyone possessing a licence (granted by magistrates) before this new law automatically retained their previous rights. Applications for new licences or variations to old licences are now the responsibility of the local authority (Bromley Council in our case). Such applications must be advertised for 28 days by notice at the site and by an advertisement in a local paper. Although not required by the Act, Bromley Council notify nearby residents by letter.
If nobody objects, the Act requires the application to be granted. Certain technical requirements must be satisfied such as a suitably qualified ‘Designated Premises Supervisor'. If anyone objects a hearing is held at the Civic Centre and a panel of three local councillors hears the evidence. Objections must be made relating to the four licensing objectives: public nuisance; crime and disorder; public safety; and protection of children from harm.
A number of requests for late opening have been refused when residents have provided evidence of existing public nuisance (usually at closing time). Police have also objected to many applications on crime and disorder grounds.
It is very difficult to refuse a new application if the applicant demonstrates that they have taken adequate steps to address the four licensing objectives. If premises fail to comply with the objectives it is open to any 'interested party' (this includes local residents) to call for a review of any licence. Bromley Trading Standards Department has followed a very aggressive test purchase scheme (for all age related products) to catch anyone selling to under age children. Four traders were caught in Petts Wood. A warning is usually issued for the first transgression but a review is requested for a second offence. Such transgressors have always had their licences suspended for a period and in one case revoked (upheld on appeal to the Magistrates Court).
Bromley is recognised as having one of the toughest licensing regimes in the country. The local licensing PC even calls me 'the hanging judge'! My perception of the wishes of the majority of local residents is that they don't like extended hours in our dormitory suburb. Councillors have done their best to uphold this wish while allowing limited extensions to responsible establishments.
As regards the display of products in the post office, the Council has no jurisdiction over this unless one (or more) of the licensing objectives can be demonstrated to have been broken." Ed.
RE: CAN YOU HELP SOLVE A MYSTERY?
Bob Boyd, Willett Way
Regarding Ann Plumb's letter in the Gazette about finding chicken eggs, we have had similar experiences. Broken chicken shells and half eaten eggs have been found in our front garden, back garden and drive. This has happened on odd occasions over the past few months. Last week a whole egg was found in the front garden, but did not have a 'sell by' date on it.
We assume it is the work of foxes that we see regularly in our garden - but where are they getting the eggs? Does anyone keep chickens these days?
PARKING AND FEES
Alan Francis, Little Thrift
Having twice assisted ladies at our Station Square parking meters it prompts me to write about some fee confusion, the benefactor of the confusion being Bromley Council. On the meter it says "Up to 1 hour - 50p". The two ladies concerned both wished to stay half that time but were both tendering 50p which they thought was the minimum fee. They were surprised when I paid 10p for a ticket for 12 minutes - all I needed to settle a newspaper account. In fairness there is lower down in much smaller print a note that the meter will accept the minimum fee of 10p. (I must admit I thought 50p was the minimum too! Ed.)
I hope the Council traffic review will not trigger an increase in charges: what is needed is a well-managed and inexpensive system which will not cause shopping customers to go elsewhere where parking is free, such as Nugent Centre or Bluewater. Bromley centre risks driving away customers due to parking charges. This week I was charged £2.70p for 2 hours and 3 minutes parking at The Glades: it would have been much cheaper to go to Bluewater even though fuel to get there is expensive.
Commuters are at present abusing Petts Wood by parking all day outside residencies in order to avoid the reasonable fees at the Railway Station car park. Since the congestion charging in central London, all-day commuter parking in Petts Wood has increased significantly.
Residents do not help by permanently using the street space outside their houses when they have ample room and a garage within their premises. The streets were provided for facilitating progress and not for long-term parking, and there is a stated case (Solomon v Durbridge) that a car could cause obstruction by being parked in one spot too long.
The whole problem revolves round the fact that there are too many cars. When I first went to school the population of this country was 30 million. I read that it is now 62 million, serviced by 22 million cars, a population explosion. We had traffic jams when the car population was 10 million!
Good luck to those who have the job of reviewing Petts Wood parking.
What do you think?
You will need to sign in to post a comment to this article. if you do not have an AboutMyArea account, you can join now for free.
