Visitors and members of the public who are unfamiliar with the building and procedures are advised that:

(a)      The fire alarm is a continuous loud ringing. In the event that a fire drill is planned during the meeting, the Chair will advise of this.

(b)      Exit routes from the chamber are located on each side of the room, one directly to a fire escape, the other to the stairs opposite the lifts.

(c)      In the event of the alarm sounding, leave the building via the nearest safe exit and gather at the assembly point on the far side of the car park. Do not leave the assembly point or re-enter the building until advised to do so. Do not use the lifts.

(d)      Anyone unable to use the stairs should make themselves known during this agenda item.

The Chair outlined the emergency evacuation procedure.

The Chair opened the meeting and asked those present to introduce themselves.

Councillors should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their families or friends.

The Chair will ask Members if they have any disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs) or disclosable non-pecuniary interests (DNPIs) to declare in respect of items on the agenda. Members with a DPI in an item must leave the room for that item and may not participate in the debate or vote. 

Aside from disclosable interests, where a fair-minded and informed observer would think there was a real possibility that a Member might be biased or predetermined on an item, the Member should declare this and leave the room while that item is considered.

Members who are in any doubt about interests, bias or predetermination should contact the monitoring officer for advice prior to the meeting.

No interests were declared.

Resolved:

That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Schedule of 12A of the Act:

1. Information relating to any individual.
2. Information which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual.

To review the licensed Premises.

The Licensing Officer introduced the report which asked Members to consider a review of a Premises Licence granted under the Licensing Act 2003 made by Chief Inspector Vanessa Foster on behalf of Kent Police. He reminded Members that the review had been requested for failing to promote the following licensing objectives: the prevention of crime and disorder; the protection of public safety; the prevention of public nuisance; and the protection of children from harm.

The Licensing Officer referred to the review application as set out at Appendix II of the report. He explained that as part of the review, the Applicant requested that the Sub-Committee considered revoking the premises license.

The Licensing Officer reported that during the 28-day consultation a representation was received from Kent County Council (KCC) Trading Standards, set out at Appendix IV of the report. 

The Licensing Officer said Kent Police Licensing provided supporting documents, CCTV files which had been circulated to the Sub-Committee and the Premises License Holder prior to the hearing. The evidence related to incidents that were part of ongoing Police investigations. These documents were marked as confidential and were exempt from public disclosure by reason that they contained information under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, there was information relating to any action taken or to be taken in connection with the prevention, investigation or prosecution of crime.

The Chair invited Members to ask questions of the Licensing Officer. There were no questions.

The Chair asked Kent Police to present their statement.

The Kent Police Licensing Officer outlined their reasons for calling for the review of the premises licence, in particular due to serious and persistent concerns regarding the sale of age-restricted products to children and repeated breaches of licence conditions.

The Kent Police Licensing Officer presented the details of visits, addressed the Sub-Committee and said the following:

·         A significant number of vape sales were made to persons under the age of 18 including children in school uniform aged between 11 and 17 years;

·         additional breaches included failure to produce CCTV, failure to ensure training records were retained, and the sale of alcohol without appropriate age verification;

·         the Premises Licence Holder had not had the shops licence on display, there were no Challenge 25 signs displayed, and he had not had refusal registers;

·         CCTV evidence showed that the Premises Licence Holder could clearly be seen accepting ID from a 15 year old child on the child’s phone despite this being contrary to a condition on their licence;

·         both the Premises Licence Holder and his wife then encouraged proxy sales by asking that child to purchase vapes for other children, and suggesting the children asked someone to purchase vapes for them which showed a complete disregard for the law relating to underage sales, the licensing objectives and the potential for harm to those children caused by vaping; and

·         CCTV had been seized by the Police following a failure to provide the CCTV in a timely manner on request by the Police.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 177.

The meeting was adjourned from 13.02 until 13.56.