TOPIC:

I first heard that the Bell would be applying to extend their licensing hours a couple months ago. At the time I was under the impression it was for Friday and Saturday nights only and until midnight. I wasn't too happy with this as I live virtually opposite and chuck out time can be a somewhat noisy. However I wasn't I bothered enough to complain.
I now understand that the application is for midnight Mondays to Thursdays and one am on a Friday and Saturday night. Speaking as a resident that lives within twenty five yards or so, I'm really not happy. Midnight closing will mean customers lingering on the street up to half past, and one o'clock till one thirty. I would undoubtedly be woken up frequently.
Later opening will attract people who are already intoxicated resulting in even louder disturbances at the extended closing times.
Then there's the CCTV cameras! This is completely out of order. I for one - and I know I'm not alone - would seriously consider drinking elsewhere (the Star is a good alternative) if these were to be introduced. It goes totally against the ethos and long standing character of the pub.
All this I have only heard recently from a fellow regular. I didn't see the notification in the window as I wasn't looking for it. Why would I? But why on earth weren't we shareholders and regulars informed by the board of their intentions, and given a chance to air our views beforehand? It beggars belief!
I understand that, if granted, these proposed hours are optional and would only be used when appropriate. This could mean occasionally or possibly continually if proved to be financially beneficial. Shareholders did not invest in the Bell to make a killing. They did so to keep the pub alive with its existing character in tact.
Please sign the petition if you are in agreement. It can be found on the wall as you enter left.
If it aint broke, DON'T FIX IT.

Point of order: The Star already has cameras, and has done for quite a while now.

Shareholders will have every opportunity to air their views. May I repeat here (with emphasis) a bit of the final paragraph of my posting in this topic on 26 October:

Our licence application is being processed to give us the option to proceed with late opening. Because the Board recognises that CCTV is an emotive issue for some people we shall be surveying our members to discover their views before we make any move to implement the licence conditions or to alter our opening times. That survey will begin as soon as possible after the Board meeting scheduled for 4 November.

I'm deeply concerned at the proposal for a late licence, let alone CCTV cameras for the Bell. And even more so that the membership weren't consulted about the proposal. The main aim of the community buyout to which we all contributed was to preserve the ethos of the Bell, and, as a co-operative, to have major policy changes put to the membership before proceeding. This proposal didn't come up at the AGM or at any other meeting. The Bell is a pub, not a night club. In a residential area. With an outdoor garden. It is a creative hub and a social meeting place. We don't want it to be a late-night drinking dive, with CCTV and bouncers. There are enough of them already and we don't need to compete with them.

This licence application should be dropped, immediately.

Thanks for your comments I am a member of the board and we take all your comment seriously. It should be noted that applying for a late license was mentioned at the AGM, we will be discussing with the members or the pub, and this is presented in the minutes of board meetings which any member can read once publish on the forum. Augusts minutes clearly mention the late licence and the need for CCTV. The plan will be to just open on Friday and Saturdays to 12pm to start with to extend the time we can remain in the pub and allow to enjoy being in the Bell for a little longer. the others days and 1pm on weekends gives us options to stay open longer on those night if we want to but I personally very much doubt this will happen routinely and would probably only be used on significant night where an 'event' was occuring. The board are very mindful of the local community and certainly do not wish to see the atmosphere change in the Bell. The few test event we have had have not seen any change in atmosphere. It should also be noted that the Star has a 3am (rarely used) it doesn't become a magnet for late night revellers except those of us who trek round from the Bell. It certainly isn't a night club either. It has a late license and CCTV and to me the atmosphere in the pub is entirely unaffected by either. But I thank you all for your comments and want to reassure you that the board are listening to all of your concerns

Here is a recent comment by the erstwhile and first General Manager of The Bell in its present management structure, who was instrumental in facilitating the community buy-out as we are enjoying it today (Patrick Cave), and which was sent to me recently by opponents of the late licence. The petition which is up in the pub now and in online form, covers the CCTV cameras only, but Patrick has raised some very valid points about the changes that would be inevitable, should a late-licence be granted for the hours requested, whether or not this licence is used for no more than a few times a year:

"If it were a brand new pub it would NOT get a garden licence until 11pm. We have that licence because of 'grandfather rights' - i.e. have had them since year dot. Rocking the boat may threaten that and cause it to be reconsidered, which the public can ask any time. We had 2 noise complaints from The Paragon in the last year I was there, including one where the complainant was asked to keep records for a period of time. This is sensitive territory which we have balanced and managed well over the years, taking it to the wire but never too far over. If all our clients were non-smokers then a late licence which was entirely internal MIGHT be possible, but they are not, and people tend to shout when leaving somewhere very late in any case, which is hard to police.

The CCTV is totally against Bell ethos and all we stand for and the way we handle ourselves. It might lead to LESS order rather than more as people will get lazy in their people skills.

The risks from this application are numerous. They might well lead cumulatively to lack of trade rather than more. Do these people think that Ian (and later, briefly I) did not do all that was possible to maximise income without killing the golden goose?

There is also something to bear in mind about rarity and psychology. The 11pm cut off, especially on band nights and weekends, means that being at The Bell is something people have to get their act together for, they arrange often in groups to meet there and those plans may include where they go on to later. The first part of the evening in the Bell is more special because of its ending time. People either go home or go on to clubs. A gradual fizzling out and milling around will ruin that. We do not, as has often been observed, want Christmas every day. (Except for a few nutters) We cannot offer the drink and drug and music fuelled mayhem of a late club. We have something great to offer at a particular time and do that well. SOOOO silly to tinker with so little thought and research. (E.g. did people go and leaflet neighbours to gauge their reactions?)"