Agenda item

Having considered the presentation of Lisa Hooper, Crime Enforcement and Regulation manager, and the objections as stated by PC Butler on behalf of the Metropolitan Police Licensing team (Lewisham), Members were unanimous in issuing a counter-notice against the TEN application submitted to the Licensing Team on 15^th September, preventing the event fixed for 11^th October at The Rutlands, Rutland Walk SE6 4EG.

Members based their decision on the following:

1) the absence of the Applicant to present their TEN application and/or answer questions in relation to objections raised by the Metropolitan police; and

2) the Applicant had failed to address Members’ concerns around public safety, i.e. to comply with current Covid regulations and a failure to engage with ESAG to provide information around stewarding and management of persons attending the event (to assist in identifying steps were undertaken by the Applicant to guarantee the safety of participants attending the event).

For these reasons, Members were of the view that the Applicant had failed to provide information/evidence to satisfy them that the licensing objectives, namely the prevention of crime and disorder and of public safety, would be met and therefore, agreed to prevent the event from going ahead on 11^th October.

4.1      The Vice Chair welcomed all parties to the meeting of the Licensing Committee. She introduced those present, and outlined the procedure to be followed for the meeting. She then invited the Crime and Enforcement Manager to introduce the application.

            Crime and Enforcement Manager         

4.2      Ms Hooper said that members were being asked to consider an application for a Temporary Event Notice for The Rutlands, Rutland Walk, SE6 4LG. The application applied for was a drive through cinema event on 11 October 2020. She outlined the activities applied for by the applicant. Representations had been received from P.C Simon Butler on the grounds of public safety and the prevention of crime and disorder.

4.3      Ms Hooper asked members to note that the Council was requesting that all events over 30 people are reviewed and signed off by the Council’s Events Safety Advisory Group (ESAG) due to the current Covid-19 regulations in force. The event was scheduled on the next ESAG agenda for 13 October 2020. The applicant had been advised to withdraw their TEN and postpone their event for 11 October 2020 with a view to resubmitting a TEN for the licensable activities for a later date after obtaining sign off from ESAG that the event was safe to go ahead. The applicant had not withdrawn their application. She outlined the options open to members of the Committee when making their decision.

Representation

4.4      The Vice Chair invited P.C Butler to make his presentation.

4.5      P.C Butler said that he objected to the application on the grounds of public safety and the prevention of crime and disorder. He referred to the fact that the event should be submitted to ESAG. He was concerned about the number of people who could attend this event, the lack of detail in the management plan, and the lack of traffic management, particularly in light of the current Covid-19 restrictions. Information from Police intelligence confirmed that this event had not been managed well in the past. Anti-social behaviour had been witnessed, the Police were called and the event was closed early.

4.6      P. C Butler said that there was no detail regarding the stewarding for the event or how they would prevent people from leaving their cars and walking around the area. He said that he did not have confidence in the management of this event and recommended that it should not go ahead.

4.7      Councillor Campbell asked what procedures were in place for the event regarding the current covid 19 restrictions. P.C Butler said that there was no plan for stewarding of the public, use of toilet facilities, or buying drinks. Although people would arrive in their cars, there were no plans to manage them if they left their cars to walk around the area.

4.8      Councillor Howard asked whether the company who would run this event would be the same as in past years.  P.C Butler confirmed that it would be the same company. They had received a number of complaints in the past from residents in the surrounding roads, who had complained about crowds of people and anti-social behaviour from patrons attending the event.

4.9      The Vice Chair said that she was satisfied that all information had been considered and members of the Committee confirmed that they had all been present throughout the proceedings. She said that the meeting would go into closed session. All parties would be advised of the decision within 5 working days. She thanked those present for attending the meeting.

            Exclusion of the Press and Public

RESOLVED that under Section 100 (A) (4) of the Local Government Act1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12 (A) of the Act, as amended by the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Access to Information) (Amendments) (England) Regulations 2006 and the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information:

4.         The Rutlands, Rutland Walk, SE6 4LG

The following is a summary of the item considered in the closed part of the meeting.

4.         The Rutlands, Rutland Walk, SE6 4LG

Having considered the presentation of Lisa Hooper, Crime Enforcement and Regulation manager, and the objections as stated by PC Butler on behalf of the Metropolitan Police Licensing team (Lewisham), Members were unanimous in issuing a counter-notice against the TEN application submitted to the Licensing Team on 15^th September, preventing the event fixed for 11^th October at The Rutlands, Rutland Walk SE6 4EG.

Members based their decision on the following:

1) the absence of the Applicant to present their TEN application and/or answer questions in relation to objections raised by the Metropolitan police; and

2) the Applicant had failed to address Members’ concerns around public safety, i.e. to comply with current Covid regulations and a failure to engage with ESAG to provide information around stewarding and management of persons attending the event (to assist in identifying steps were undertaken by the Applicant to guarantee the safety of participants attending the event).

For these reasons, Members were of the view that the Applicant had failed to provide information/evidence to satisfy them that the licensing objectives, namely the prevention of crime and disorder and of public safety, would be met and therefore, agreed to prevent the event from going ahead on 11^th October.