Agenda and draft minutes

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs: George Savva (Vice Chair), Maria Alexandrou, Hivran Dalkaya, Chris Dey, Guney Dogan and Paul Pratt.

Apologies for lateness were received from Cllrs: Peter Fallart and Elif Erbil.

Members are asked to declare any disclosable pecuniary, other pecuniary or non-pecuniary interests relating to items on the agenda.

No declarations of interest were received.

To present the Licensing Policy and the Gambling Policy post public consultation to the Licensing Committee prior to the report going to Cabinet with a recommendation to Full Council for adoption.

Esther Hughes introduced the key aspects of the report:

a.    The Licensing Act and Gambling Act policies were both being reviewed, as was the statutory requirement every 5 and 3 years respectively. 

b.    The Licensing Committee were to note the recommend the proposals outlined in the report to Council for approval, with the aim for them to be published/ adopted in January 2025.

c.     A public consultation had taken place for both policies, with 20 responses being received in relation to the Licensing Policy and 4 for the Gambling Policy, which the team were relatively pleased by.

d.    The Licensing Policy sought to retain the existing 4 Cumulative Impact Zones in Edmonton (which covered Upper Edmonton, Lower Edmonton and Edmonton Green), Enfield Highway, Enfield Town and Southgate. Two new Cumulative Impact Zones would be introduced in Bowes and Palmers Green wards. Cumulative Impact Zones previously had timeframes, until which they were not active, but these had been removed, so they would become 24 hour.

e.    Refusal in respect of sexual entertainment venues was being continued.

The following questions and comments were received with regards to the Licensing Act:

a.    In response to members queries relating to the proliferation of betting premises on high streets, officers responded that the Cumulative Impact Zones, were in relation to the Licensing Act. They previously had core hours of 8am to midnight, but as more complaints had been received earlier in the day, the evidence supported the change for them to apply all day. The Gambling Vulnerability Zones were very similar in area to the Cumulative Impact Zones, and meant that there was an onus on operators in those areas to give more consideration to their risk assessments and the local area profile, but these did not have a timeframe.

b.    In response to Members’ questions and comments regarding Cumulative Impact Zones in other wards, officers replied that there was certain criteria which needed to be met for an area to qualify as a Cumulative Impact Zone, namely levels of crime and anti-social behaviour. All wards had been looked at and compared, and there wasn’t enough evidence to justify introducing new Cumulative Impact Zones in other wards, but these were on the radar and could be reviewed and added in the future if there was evidence to support this.

c.     In response to Members’ enquiries in respect of a introducing a maximum number of betting premises in an area, officers advised that this was not possible under the Gambling Act, and that any such controls would fall within planning policy.

Esther Hughes highlighted the key aspects of the Gambling Policy:

a.    There were two new Gambling Vulnerability Areas, which mirrored the current Edmonton and Enfield Highway Cumulative Impact Zones. The report and supplementary detailed exactly which wards and roads/areas these referred to.

b.    The nil casino resolution, which the borough historically always had, was also sought to be retained.

The following questions and comments were received with regards to the Gambling Act:

a.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.