CREDIT: Picture by Zach Rowlandson
Licensing within the night-time economy is one of those areas where the excitement of city life meets the reality of regulation, and all too often, the result is confusion and frustration. Our cities thrive after dark because of the vibrancy and creativity that venues, bars, and entertainment spaces bring. Yet the very people who make this possible often find themselves caught in a web of inconsistent licensing decisions, where outcomes can feel more determined by personalities on the ground than by clear rules or shared principles. For many operators, the same application can receive very different responses depending on who is sitting in the decision-making seat. This inconsistency is not just frustrating; it erodes trust, undermines confidence, and makes it harder to build the kind of night-time economy that benefits everyone.
Philip Kolvin KC, working with the Institute of Licensing, is doing some remarkable work to try to address this. His Partnership Charter brings together all stakeholders in a way that encourages dialogue, mutual respect, and shared problem-solving. The Charter recognises that real, sustainable solutions require collaboration rather than confrontation. It is an attempt to codify what should be common sense: that operators, Police, and licensing authorities should be working towards the same goals, safe, vibrant, and thriving night-time spaces, rather than pulling in opposite directions. There is hope in this approach, because it shows that even within a system that can feel adversarial, partnership is possible.
But for all its promise, the Partnership Charter also highlights the gaps in our current licensing environment. Too often, decisions are left to the interpretation of individuals rather than being guided by a structured framework. Personal experiences, subjective judgements, or even temporary mood can influence the proportionality of a decision. Good and bad operators present challenges, of course, but we must also recognise that there are good and bad representatives within Police and local authorities too. When personal reflections drive decisions, trust is lost and the perception of fairness is undermined. It’s not enough to simply aim for compliance; what is needed is a system where outcomes are predictable, transparent, and consistent.
Inconsistencies manifest in many ways. Sometimes an operator will face an overly cautious approach from a licensing authority that prioritises risk avoidance over proportionate response. Other times, a licence may be granted with minimal scrutiny, leaving neighbours or the public feeling neglected. The narrative of partnership often suffers because of these extremes. Operators may feel they are constantly under scrutiny, while authorities may feel their decisions are not fully respected or understood. Across countless examples, it becomes clear that there is a lack of knowledge at authority level and a significant loss of trust between stakeholders. Without a clear framework to guide decisions, inconsistencies will continue to appear, and with them, frustration and disengagement.
There is also an attitude within some authorities that if they don’t understand something, or if it seems to create a burden, the simplest solution is to remove it. This “Reflexive removal strategy” approach can be hugely damaging to a dynamic industry like nightlife. In reality, what is needed is education and awareness. Authorities need to understand how the market is evolving, how operators are responding to new considerations, and how these changes affect the way venues operate safely and responsibly. The night-time economy is fast-moving, and it’s challenging enough for operators to keep pace. Expecting authorities to recognise the integral workings of nightlife, given their broader roles and responsibilities, is not unreasonable, it’s essential. Equally, we need clarity and the removal of ambiguous wording in both policy and legislation. When rules and guidance are vague, it leaves too much room for interpretation, increases the risk of inconsistent decisions, and further undermines trust.
Clear, unambiguous language benefits everyone: operators know what is expected, authorities know how to act proportionately, and the wider public benefits from transparency and fairness. This again emphasises why partnership and trust are so critical: only through genuine collaboration can authorities be kept informed, operators be supported, and outcomes be fair and proportionate.
It is also important to recognise that there are already some excellent examples of working practice between operators and authorities. Across the country, there are partnerships where communication is open, expectations are clear, and decisions are evidence-based. In these cases, venues are able to innovate safely, authorities can fulfil their responsibilities without unnecessary conflict, and the local community benefits from high standards of trade and safer, more vibrant nightlife. These examples demonstrate what can be achieved when the principles of the Partnership Charter are applied in practice, and they serve as models for other areas to follow.
So how can we build a fairer system? A critical step is to establish a clear decision-making framework that reduces reliance on personal judgement and brings transparency to the process. Such a framework would focus on measurable, evidence-based outcomes, ensuring that decisions are consistent, regardless of which individuals are involved. Benchmarking decisions and creating structured guidance prevents operators from flying under the radar and hiding from engagement, and it gives authorities confidence that they are presenting a fair and proportionate position. When everyone knows the rules of engagement, it allows for dialogue rather than conflict, helping to ensure decisions are balanced and just.
At the same time, it is vital to restore confidence between stakeholders. Partnership cannot exist if trust is absent. This requires an ongoing commitment to communication and engagement, where concerns are addressed before they escalate into disputes. It also means training and knowledge-sharing to ensure that everyone involved in licensing decisions understands the legal framework, the principles of proportionality, and the realities of operating venues in a modern night-time economy. Only by investing in understanding and dialogue can we remove the guesswork and subjectivity that currently dominate so many licensing outcomes.
The benefits of this approach are clear. It builds better relationships, strengthens the night-time economy, improves standards of trade, and ensures that operators who are committed to compliance and quality are recognised rather than penalised for minor inconsistencies. Importantly, the focus is on unconditional partnership, not control. Authorities retain their powers and responsibilities, but the approach is collaborative rather than adversarial. Operators feel engaged, Police have confidence in fair decision-making, and the community benefits from safer, higher-quality night-time experiences.
Ultimately, the work being led by Philip Kolvin KC and the Institute of Licensing offers a blueprint for how things could be different. By prioritising partnership, collaboration, clear frameworks, and unambiguous guidance, it is possible to move away from ad hoc, personality-driven decision-making and towards a system that is fair, considered, and consistent. Operators can plan and invest with confidence, Police can enforce responsibly, and local authorities can make decisions that are respected and understood. It is not an easy journey, and it requires ongoing effort from everyone involved, but it is achievable.
Licensing within the night-time economy does not have to be a battleground. With the right framework, a commitment to partnership, education, and the practical guidance that the Partnership Charter provides, we can build a system that works for everyone. By taking personal reflections out of the decision-making process, benchmarking decisions, clarifying rules, and fostering genuine dialogue, we can restore trust, deliver consistency, encourage better standards of trade, and ensure that our night-time economies are not just vibrant, but fair, safe, and sustainable. The potential is there; it is up to us to seize it, and the work being done with the Institute of Licensing shows that with thoughtfulness and collaboration, we can finally get there.
