Adult entertainment update

More news catch up from August. The application for a lapdancing club on Peckham High Street was withdrawn by the applicant. Many thanks to everyone who signed the petition and helped in the campaign.

More current news - Friday was the end of the consultation period for the review of Southwark Council's licensing policy. As you may recall I've been campaigning for a much tougher policy on adult entertainment clubs. I've been working with my colleagues in The Lane and Peckham ward on a response to the consultation which can be found here.

Special thanks to Cllrs Gordon Nardell and Susan Elan Jones who are the principal authors of the response.

No to Lapdancing in Peckham - the petition

My Labour colleagues in Peckham and The Lane wards are leading the campaign against a 24hr lapdancing club opening on Peckham High Street. It would be almost next door to St James the Great Primary School and opposite the Academy @ Peckham secondary school.

WE BELIEVE THAT:

• The nature of a table dancing/lap dancing club so near to schools, shoppers, residential areas and busy roads and pavements is inappropriate;
• Both the proposed 24 hour operations AND this use could have a damaging effect on the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, the prevention of nuisance, and the protection of children from harm;
• Such a club would hinder the efforts to clean up Peckham High Street and the town centre and would deter good quality investment by other businesses;

AND WE ASK SOUTHWARK COUNCIL TO REFUSE THE APPLICATION FOR THIS LICENCE, WHETHER FOR 24 HOUR OPERATION OR AT ALL.

If you agree please sign our online petition here.

Lapdancing - London Bridge safe, but Peckham under threat?

We've had some good news about the plans for a lapdancing club on Tooley Street. The ultimate landlord for the club, Network Rail, have announced that lapdancing will not be permitted and they will evict the club if necessary. The club is still going to open, but apparently as a piano bar (whatever that is). The Southwark Stakeholders are not entirely convinced and plan to keep a close eye on the club as they still fear it will cause trouble in the surrounding area.

So some good news - but the fight to change the council's licensing policy goes on. It's just lucky in this case that the landlord has put their foot down. I'm sure that's largely thanks to the high profile campaign run by local residents, the Dean of Southwark Cathedral and Ken Livingstone. Southwark Council and its licensing policy did absolutely nothing to protect the interests of local residents, businesses and workers. We could easily see more clubs trying to open in the borough, especially as Westminster Council is taking such a tough stance on this.

The latest I've heard is that a club in Peckham is applying for a 24hr license and to have lapdancing. I don't know exactly where it is, but if Streetmap is right it's almost next door to St James the Great Primary School and opposite The Academy @ Peckham secondary school.

Fortunately, unlike the ones in Riverside, the local councillors for Peckham ward and The Lane ward have been quick off the mark and are working with local residents to fight against the application. I'd like to think that the proximity to the schools would be enough to stop this club getting a license, but the club on Tooley Street was right next to children's tourist attractions and that wasn't enough to stop it getting a license under the current Southwark policy regime.

The policy has to change. The consultation on this has started and goes on till the end of September. Have your say here.

Council Assembly 1 - Lapdancing & Licensing

No Lapdancing 4
Originally uploaded by Fiona Colley.

The main event of the evening was a deputation calling for changes to Southwark Council's policy on licensing adult entertainment clubs.

In December Southwark Council granted a license for a lapdancing club to open in Tooley Street, close to London Bridge Station, the London Dungeons, HMS Belfast, the Unicorn Children's Theatre, Southwark Cathedral and City Hall (base of the Mayor of London and the GLA).

Since then a campaign group has formed trying to get this license revoked and also to get Southwark Council's licensing policy changed so that no more clubs can open.

The group consists of local residents, people who work in the area, church goers, the Southwark Islamic forum, local businesses and the Mayor of London.

Their shared concern is not what goes on inside the club (although many of them do take a dim view of that), but the impact the club will have on the area outside the club. Past experience both in Southwark and elsewhere indicates that this kind of club can bring with it increases in anti-social behaviour, solicitation and sexual assults. More info here.

Westminster Council has a lot of experience with this and they recently adopted a tough licensing policy which bans new clubs from opening in close proximity to residential areas, schools, places of worship and community facilities (basically everywhere in the borough).

In contrast Southwark Council has no specific restrictions on adult entertainment.

I've been involved with the campaign for some time now as I work up at London Bridge. Initially the focus was on making legal challenges to try to stop the club opening. Those have failed and it is now accepted that the club will open.

So attention has turned to changing Southwark's policy which is where I've really been able to help.

I arranged for representatives from the group to come down to the Town Hall to make their concerns known to councillors. As well as protesting on the steps of the Town Hall, they also made a presentation at the meeting, following which I moved a motion calling for a review of the licensing policy.

Sadly the LibDems and Tories prefer to play politics with this issue. They refuse to take responsibility for our weak policy and keep trying to claim that national legislation prevents them from taking a strong stance which just doesn't stack up when you look at the policy of Westminster Council. So they used their majority to amend my motion and include lots of government bashing.

They did leave in our calls for a full review of local policy and proper consultation, so even though we didn't agree with everything they'd inserted about national legislation, we voted for the final version of the motion because we want the review too much to worry about their petty party politicing.