Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Deborah Croxton and Cllr Jordan Meade. Cllr Lyn Milner and Cllr Gurjit Bains attended as their substitutes.  An apology was also received from Cllr Leslie Pearton.

The minutes of the meeting held on Monday 2 September 2024 were signed by the Chair. 

Derek Ashenden and Helen Ashenden declared an ‘other interest’ in that they were members of Higham Village Club.

The Committee were presented with the Three-Yearly Review of Statement of Gambling Policy.    The purpose of the report was to present Members with the responses to the consultation for the Statement of Gambling Policy.

The Assistant Licensing Manager explained that the draft Gambling Act Policy and No Casino Resolution was previously presented to Licencing Committee on 2 September 2024 where approval was given to begin a consultation process.

Members were updated that the consultation process took place between 3 – 30 September 2024 with only once response received from Cllr Jenny Wallace, confirming her support to the No Casino Resolution.

Following the consultation, it was recommended that no changes were to be made to the draft policy. Member approval was sought to recommend that Full Council approve the draft policy and the ratification of the No Casino Resolution, for implementation in January 2025.

The Committee noted the report and approved the recommendation.

The Committee were presented with the Street Trading Resolution and Policy.  The purpose of the report was to present the current provision for Street Trading in Gravesham and the proposals to implement a policy and process.

The Assistant Licensing Manager outlined key points from the report:

·        The definition of street trading was explained in the report as ‘the selling, exposing or offering for sale of any article (including a living thing) in a street’. The report outlined the definition of a street, what exemptions there were to street trading and the different designations that could be given to streets.

·        In order to implement a revised procedure, the authority was required to draft and consult on a resolution, declaring which roads the authority would permit trading on.  Members were updated that currently in Gravesham, there were a few locations where trading was permitted under a resolution.  However, over time a number of these areas had been lost due to the A2 move in 2009.  It was noted that there was now only 1 licensed trader, who was based by Strood Academy.

·        The proposed policy would clearly set out a regime that would permit well controlled street trading, thereby energising the local economy and communities.

·        It was proposed that all previous resolutions be replaced with the new resolution, that all roads, pavements, verges, laybys or similar pieces of land forming part of the public highway, unless there is a payment for entry, were designated as consent streets. Along with the new resolution there was a proposed draft Street Trading Policy, which was provided in appendix A of the report.

·        Members were informed that the resolution and draft Street Trading Policy had been developed in consultation with several Council departments.

·        The Committee were informed that the necessary consultation was set out by legislation in regard to the resolution, which required advertisement in the newspaper.  Under law both the Police and Highways would be consulted regarding the resolution. The authority had also decided to consult with the public, other authorities and organisations.  Consultation would take place for the draft policy at the same time as the resolution, for a 4 week period.

·        Any responses and any recommendations of amendments to the resolution or policy would be presented to Management Team and then the Licensing Committee in February 2025.

The Committee noted the report.

The Chair noted that there had been no further panel hearings since the last Committee meeting.  However, reminded Members that Ward Councillors had the power to call in applications to be heard in front of a licensing panel, so stressed the importance of Members checking applications within their area. 

The Committee requested that all Members receive notification of new licensing applications, rather than just to the relevant Ward Councillor.  This would thereby allow Members to discuss and consult each other and then refer an application to the licensing panel if required. The Licensing Manager agreed this could be put into place moving forward.  She went on to point out that if a Member of the Committee chose to make a representation, they would not be able to sit on the panel in question, but only attend as a Councillor making a representation.  If the premises the hearing relates to is within a Councillors Ward, they can’t sit on the panel for that hearing, even if they don’t submit a representation.

RESOLVED that all Members would receive licensing application notifications moving forward.

The Chair requested an update regarding the Magistrate hearing for King News & Wine, 21C Kings Street.  The Assistant Licensing Manager reminded the Committee that the case had initially been referred by Kent Police and heard by the Licensing Panel, in which the license was revoked.  The license holder appealed the decision.  Under legislation if the appeal was submitted within 21 days, the applicant was entitled to continue trading, which had been the case.  Legal had attended the first Magistrates hearing and the current date for the hearing of appeal was 6 June 2025.  Checks were being carried out at the premises with two in July and one at the end of October.  At each check the license holder was fully adhering to the conditions of their license.  The checks would continue. 

Members expressed their shock and disappointment on the timeframe of the next hearing but appreciated the situation with the courts. Committee members also expressed their frustration that the licensee was permitted to still trade in the interim, especially since the panel felt the decision was in the best interest of the protection of the local community. The Chair agreed but understood the position.  It was suggested once the magistrate’s decision was made, if necessary further discussion would be held regarding the process.