Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Sankey.

There were no specific declarations of interest, however the Chair confirmed that the Committee had been on a site visit to Under the Prom prior to the meeting.

The Licensing and Public Protection Manager introduced the report as published.

There were no Member questions.

The first objector addressed the committee and made the following points:

-       It was requested that the conditions are not watered down by the committee.

-       The council itself has said that it is aware of the problems that surround SEV’s.

-       Women are being objectified.

-       Working in a strip club is not like being a Dream Boy or a drag queen.

-       Lap dancing is not an easy way to make money in some cases performers will pay the operator or perform and 70% of women do not get any money at the end of the night. 

-       There was acknowledgement that the house mother at Eroticats has said it is the best organisation that she has worked for.

-       She would like to see the council enforce the limits to include no leafletting or advertising.

The responses to Member questions to the objector were as follows:

-       Neither of the two options that are available are not good options but would prefer that SEV’s are regulated.

-       The leaflets that are being handed out do have the name of the club on them and Eroticats can gain the contact details of the customers.

-       The objector acknowledged the effort that the Council has made to get the law changed and really appreciated that Cheltenham is getting “a raw deal”.

The next objector addressed the committee and made the following points:

-       There is a national emergency for the treatment of women and girls.

-       There was concern raised that there were breaches in March 2024.

-       If the licence is granted the objector would ask that the performers do not work in booths and that touching is not permitted.

The responses to Member questions were as follows:

-       Consideration needs to be given with regard to the safety of women and girls.

-       There was acknowledgement that the Council are in a difficult position with regard to the exemption, the objector would like the standard conditions applied.

-       The objector also confirmed that it was heartening to hear the efforts the committee is going to.

The final objector was not able to be present at the meeting and her speech was read out by a Democratic Services Officer and the following points were made:

-       Outside of race meets there appears to be no demand for strip clubs in Cheltenham, there are no permanent strip clubs operating in the town.

-       The proposed venue is outside of the Councils designated permitted zone.

-       Conditions 18 and 25 state that there should be no touching between performers and performers and customers, however during March race week in 2024 multiple breaches of these conditions were observed at the premises.

-       It was acknowledged that the premises tries its best with their security measures etc, however this did not prevent breaches occurring.

-       It is possible for the Council to deviate from the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

 The Chair excused himself prior to the start of the item as he had had some previous contact with the driver regarding this matter.  Councillor Boyes as Deputy Chair took over as Chair for this item.

The Senior Licensing Officer introduced the report as published.

The responses to Member questions were as follows:

-       The policy hasn’t been implemented yet.

-       It was also confirmed that there have been a few instances of drivers being in the same position.

The driver then addressed the committee and stated that:

-       He had been out of work since Christmas.

-       The WAV’s that he has looked at are in a worse condition than his current vehicle.

-       He really wants to get back to work.

There were no Member questions – the matter then went to Member debate where the following points were raised:

-       The understanding is that the WAV policy is under review therefore cannot see a reason to object.

-       It seems totally reasonable to grant as in favour of a mixed fleet.

-       The driver clearly wants to work and discretion has been given to other drivers and other drivers have been granted permission to do this.

-       The idea of a mixed fleet is interesting.

The Senior Licensing Officer confirmed that the previous considerations for not having a WAV were saloon car drivers.

The applicant was then given the right to reply where he stated that he had been a driver for 40 years, he also stated that trying to find a silver WAV is very difficult.

The Senior Licensing Officer confirmed that they are happy with the vehicle that  the applicant was looking at.

The matter then went to the vote to approve:

Granted - Unanimously

That in accordance with Section 100A(4) Local Government Act 1972 the public be excluded from the meeting for the remaining agenda items as it is likely that, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, if members of the public are present there will be disclosed to them exempt information as defined in paragraph 1 and 2, Part (1) Schedule (12A) Local Government Act 1972, namely:

Paragraph 1; Information relating to any individual

Paragraph 2; Information which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual

That in accordance with Section 100A(4) Local Government Act 1972 the public be excluded from the meeting for the remaining agenda items as it is likely that, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, if members of the public are present there will be disclosed to them exempt information as defined in paragraph 1 and 2, Part (1) Schedule (12A) Local Government Act 1972, namely:

Paragraph 1; Information relating to any individual

Paragraph 2; Information which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual

The committee voted unanimously on the above.

Councillor Willingham returned to the meeting and resumed his position as Chair.

The Licensing Officer introduced the report as published.

The Members asked the applicant some questions and the matter went to Member debate.

After the debate the matter went to the vote to grant and the decision was unanimous to grant.

There were none.