Guidance

Think local, act local: how public health teams can support licensing policy reviews

Updated 9 August 2019

1. Introduction

The statement of licensing policy (SLP) is an important document for local authorities, responsible authorities and applicants alike. It sets out a vision for the local authority area and identifies potential risks and considerations that exist locally. Fundamental principles are outlined in more detail in the Revised Guidance issued under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003.

All statements of policy should begin by stating the 4 licensing objectives, which are:

1. The prevention of crime and disorder.
2. Public safety.
3. The prevention of public nuisance.
4. The protection of children from harm.

1.1 SLP review is an opportunity for public health involvement

When it’s time to review the SLP, there is a real opportunity for public health teams to have input into how licensable activities operate. Influencing SLP reviews requires a good understanding of the local context.

It also means working with other responsible authorities to identify appropriate measures for the local authority area, such as the:

• police
• local fire authority
• environmental health team
• trading standards office
• local safeguarding children’s board
• local planning authority

A list of responsible authorities and their contact details can usually be found on the licensing section of the council website.

1.2 How the SLP consultation works

Licensing authorities must prepare and publish a SLP every 5 years which sets out how they will exercise their licensing functions in relation to alcohol, late-night refreshment and entertainment.

The licensing authority must keep the SLP under review and may revise it when appropriate. For example, they might make revisions in the light of feedback from responsible authorities or the local community on whether the licensing objectives are being met.

1.3 What does this mean for public health teams?

As a responsible authority, the director of public health or their nominated person within the public health team, is a statutory consultee to any revision to the SLP and should expect to contribute relevant evidence, and for their response to be given appropriate weight. When it comes to part revisions, public health teams can be proactive and pass on feedback or evidence to the licensing authority where they think it is relevant to the licensing objectives.

While SLPs set out a general approach to making licensing decisions, they must be consistent with the Licensing Act 2003 and the promotion of the 4 licensing objectives. Ensure that anything public health teams propose is relevant to the licensing objectives and structure the response to reflect those associations.

1.4 How the consultation process is set up

There is no ‘one size fits all’ response to licensing and each local licensing authority will have their own way of consulting with responsible authorities and getting responses. But there are little things that public health teams can do to be more effective and make their evidence more impactful.

As there are no statutory rules on how to carry out a consultation, licensing authorities are able to decide how they will consult on reviews of the SLP, but they should have regard to the government’s code of practice on consultations.

Revision includes undertaking a full and detailed consultation process that can be conducted across a wide range of platforms including email, direct contact, workshops, social media, and public events. The process should aim to seek the views of as many people as possible such as local residents and businesses (including those who have an interest in licensable activities).

It is for each licensing authority to determine the length of time they will consult, but the government’s code of practice advises that they should last for at least 12 weeks, with consideration given to longer timescales where workable and sensible.

Building good relationships with licensing authorities should ensure that local public health teams are aware when a policy comes up for review.

1.5 Engaging stakeholders

Licensing authority officers who are responsible for writing the SLP might not always be aware of wider health stakeholders who could provide valuable input into the consultation.

Public health teams should think about who else could benefit from seeing the SLP consultation and work with them to collect their views, for example:

• the local clinical commissioning group
• alcohol treatment providers
• colleagues on the health and wellbeing board

Public health teams should also think about how to engage with the local community on licensing issues and alcohol-related harms.

Public health teams should consider what service user groups or networks the public health team has access to and who may have relevant insights. For example, within Solihull there are good links between licensing and the wider strategic work around reducing alcohol-related harm, and the licensing lead for the borough is a member of the alcohol and drugs strategic management meeting.

2. Be clear about what value public health can add

Public health teams are experts in the public health field and are responsible for presenting the public health perspective to other responsible authorities and decision makers. Thinking through the reasons why public health teams are contributing, and articulating this is important. Public health teams should not assume this will be obvious to others involved in licensing.

Public health teams need to be clear how the local statement of licensing policy can address any problems identified in the local area and be realistic in what the policy can achieve.

For example, Gateshead’s SLP describes how public health data enables the licensing authority to identify the most vulnerable locations in the local authority. It shows how data can help track trends over time and how it is relevant to the 4 licensing objectives.

It also states that the public health team will lead on producing ‘local licensing guidance’ which will assist people engaged in licensable activities to understand the issues in the local area that need urgent action, which they intend to operate.

Read Gateshead’s full statement of licensing policy.

The section 182 guidance provides advice on what should and should not be considered within an SLP. It is useful for public health teams to familiarise themselves with the specific SLP section to help in thinking through how to structure a response and where to explore data. For example, 14.51 of the section 182 guidance states:

The 2003 Act gives the licensing authority power to make decisions regarding licensed opening hours as part of the implementation of its licensing policy statement and licensing authorities are best placed to make such decisions based on their local knowledge and in consultation with other responsible authorities.

Public health teams should consider what perspective they can offer around licensing hours based on local public health knowledge.

It’s important that public health teams remember the audience when going through the process of responding. Public health data and messages have to make sense. The response submitted and the data provided should translate into the licensing context, and be presented so that its relevance is clear to non-specialists. This may mean changing the way public health information is presented or learning more about the specialist language used in licensing.

For example, public health teams should think about when to explain or reword terms such as ‘alcohol attributable fractions’ or ‘burden of disease’ to make them relevant to the intended audience.

3. Get the structure right

How public health teams structure their response is as important as the evidence they provide. Making a convincing case, developing the narrative, and establishing core principles are at the heart of a persuasive submission.

When responding, public health teams should consider what concerns they have and what they support within the SLP policy that is being consulted. This could include measures that the council are suggesting and also reflect the type of drinking environment the public health team would like to see in the local area. For example, what a diverse daytime and night-time economy that promotes the licensing objectives could look like.

When stating concerns or offering suggestions, public health teams should include information to support these claims and outline what mitigating features there could be to address any concerns.

When preparing a response, public health teams should make sure the information most relevant to licensing is the first thing that people see. Public health teams should not just add lots of statistics or information and should consider what that information is there for and what it is trying to achieve. Having a clear narrative makes it easier to make the case and focusing the data on the specific areas of concern in their local authority is more likely to be engaging to licensing officers and committee members, which makes public health teams’ contribution relevant.

International evidence can be powerful in a public health environment, and academic research may be critical in supporting evidential claims, but public health teams should not rely on it to persuade the licensing audience. Focus on what is happening locally and link it to the licensing objectives.

For example, the Solihull SLP recognises that alcohol can cause harm within the local area and sets out Solihull’s commitment to reducing alcohol-related harm within the borough. The SLP makes it clear that public health teams are able to provide useful evidence of alcohol-related harm in relation to cumulative impact, and particularly around identifying areas where there may be vulnerable groups who may be at higher risk of alcohol-related harm. Read the full statement of licensing policy.

4. Focus on the data

4.1 Data is critical, but make sure it’s to the point

Public health teams are experts in gathering and analysing data and have access to a range of information that other responsible authorities do not have. Public health teams should make the most of this specialism.

Demonstrating public health teams’ understanding of local data and evidence will help guide and clarify why they are engaging in a review.

To support public health teams, Public Health England (PHE) has developed a worksheet of available data sources, which are relevant to the licensing objectives. Public health teams can use this to explore data sources that might be able to add to the information they are already aware of.

Public health teams should be conscious that local health data is much more compelling than regional or national information. Higher-level data can be useful in setting the context but are unlikely to be enough to justify changes to local practice.

Public health teams should be precise in identifying where there is cause for concern, and which data are relevant to demonstrating the issues linked to the 4 licensing objectives.

Some public health teams have developed data prioritisation tools. These can provide a helpful way of applying criteria on whether to get involved in licensing decisions. Some of these tools can be helpful, for example, in identifying wards (or other areas) where there are particularly pressing issues. Examples of some of the tools currently used can be found on the knowledge hub (please create an account to log in).

4.2 Get insights from the local community

Local data and evidence does not just include public health data and statistics but information and insights collected from local residents. Information from businesses and service providers are also of equal relevance. This information can bring to life the issues in a way that statistics or data cannot, by building a better picture of what is happening in a local area.

Public health teams should think about how they can add to the data they collect by developing (or collating) qualitative evidence from the local area.

Does the local alcohol treatment provider have information on where clients are regularly buying alcohol? For example, Middlesbrough’s hospital intervention and liaison team has been supporting their local authority by asking the following 3 questions:

1. What specific alcohol products are being consumed?
2. How much alcohol is being consumed?
3. Which premises are products being purchased from?

Compile this information alongside other sources of information from the police, community safety and health to give a better picture of what is happening locally and identify areas of concern.

Public health teams might want to consider how they can get the views on what concerns residents and local business about their area and how these concerns are impacted by where and how alcohol is sold. For example, the public health team in Medway engaged local resident and business community groups on their views and experiences about alcohol-related harms during their recent cumulative impact policy (CIP) and SLP review processes.

Along with a Medway wide quarterly citizens’ survey that was sent to a cross section of residents, a questionnaire, developed by the public health team, was sent out to community and business groups in areas that had been identified as being potentially suitable for a CIP. The questionnaire included a free text entry to allow respondents to write about their own personal experiences.

Respondents identified issues such as begging, litter and other nuisance, and the areas of most concern coincided with those identified by the public health and police data.

The Medway SLP is available here and a case study is available on the knowledge hub forum using data in alcohol licensing.

5. It’s not just about alcohol

Do not forget that the Licensing Act 2003 covers late-night refreshment (fast food) and entertainment establishments. If public health teams are going to respond to a consultation they may have information about these issues alongside insights on alcohol-related harm in the area.

What information, interventions or advice do public health teams and their colleagues in other parts of the council have that could be appropriately included within the SLP consultation?

Public health teams can provide the bridge between regulatory frameworks and the wider policy objectives that the licensing regime should support.

Where there is evidence of relevant issues, public health teams can use their insights on health inequalities to influence SLPs in reducing the clustering of late-night takeaways. For instance, Newcastle’s Good Food Plan sets out ways of promoting a vibrant and diverse sustainable food economy. Public health teams can influence the licensing authority’s SLP to help achieve this vibrancy and diversity by militating against problems that are undermining the licensing objectives caused by clustering of late-night takeaways, particularly in deprived areas.

PHE has produced Healthy High Streets: good place making in an urban setting, a report on how the high street can impact on health.

6. Think across the system

6.1 Learn from other areas

Licensing does not operate in a vacuum; it can impact directly and indirectly on other areas of public health work. Public health teams should consider what role they can play in pulling together the various threads of policy and strategy that the licensing regimes may support.

Public health teams should think about how to co-ordinate and integrate policies, strategies and initiatives that might indirectly impact on the licensing objectives.

While there is currently no licensing system for tobacco retailers in England, there is strict legislation on issues designed to protect children from harm, such as age of sale restrictions and proxy purchasing (where people purchase for someone else). There will also likely be local enforcement activity to tackle criminal activity, such as the sale of illegal tobacco from shops and other premises, which may have a license to sell alcohol. Local colleagues in trading standards and environmental health will have an overview of this activity, as should the local tobacco control alliance lead.

Public health teams should consider what role they can have in engaging with the planning process and how the information they have, for example, on alcohol-related harm could inform strategy and individual decisions.

There might be useful examples or frameworks from other areas of public health’s work that public health teams can use to structure their contribution and save time.

6.2 Examples from other SLPs: gambling

Gambling SLPs can include local area profiles. A local area profile is an assessment of the important characteristics of the local area in relation to gambling and the types of people that are at risk of gambling-related harm. It includes local demographics and a range of information on the impacts of gambling. This model could provide a useful framework on how to structure information for alcohol licensing. Public health teams should check out the Gambling Commission or a local councils’ gambling SLP to see if they have done this.

7. Links and resources

PHE has produced a range of guidance and support materials to help promote public health’s role as a responsible authority in alcohol licensing.

PHE has produced child sexual exploitation guidance, which describes potential vulnerabilities and indicators of abuse, and the appropriate action to take in response, and includes reference to licensing.

Home Office guidance on licensing is available here.

Visit the knowledge hub forum for additional case studies and to share learning around local attempts to use data better in influencing licensing decisions.