More complaints of 'vomiting and urinating in the street' and 'used condoms' left lying around on pavements in a picturesque village have been made as councillors debated the impact out-of-control revellers visiting it are having on residents.
The report of noise, damage, anti-social behaviour, sex in public areas, drug use and drunkenness in Whalley were raised at Ribble Valley Council.
However, despite the issues, the meeting was told no one has called for a review of any premises licence, meaning no action can be taken yet.
It came as the borough’s licensing committee agreed to start a formal consultation on renewing a licensing arrangement called the Whalley Cumulative Impact Assessment (CIA).
music, DJs and dancing in the village must demonstrate their activity will not make things worse.
It means people seeking a new licence, or wanting to change an existing licence around alcohol sales, opening hours, liveAn informal consultation was held recently and councillors highlighted public comments from that at the latest licensing committee, and the formal consultation will come next including feedback from the police.
Whalley County Councillor Ged Mirfin, addressed the committee, raising various complaints and suggesting solutions.
Some, such as crime and anti-social behaviour, were for the police. Others, such as litter, music disturbance or taxi arrangements, were under Ribble Valley Council’s remit, he said.
He said noise and disturbance were key issues, and there was also intimidating and ‘unsavoury’ activity, including vomit and urine on the streets, lewd behaviour and used condoms being found.
Mr Mirfin said: “When reading the report, my girlfriend said ‘Ugh, used condoms. Yuk. Well, Ged, small mercies, at least horny couples are actually using protection and reducing sexually transmitted diseases'.”
In response, Councillor Kevin Horkin said: “What astonishes me is the impact on residents, bearing in mind the CIA has been in place for some years.
"Residents are still – still – having to contend with this appalling situation. I’m absolutely staggered.
"I don’t know what residents must think of this authority. Having read the details, this is a roll-call of shameful behaviour that we have allowed, as councillors, on our watch.
“The biggest disappointment for me was that we had a cross-party letter, asking for a review of premises where most of the allegations come from, but it was refused.
"It was raised at a full council meeting. Let’s get this sorted out once and for all.”
Mair Hill, a council legal officer, told the meeting: “Anyone can apply for a licensing review including the public, but it is not this committee’s role to call for reviews. It’s quite the opposite.
"This licensing committee should be ‘uninvolved’ but be able to act as a ‘judge’."
Stephen Barker, the borough’s solicitor, added: “It’s not expected that this committee should apply for a review on behalf of others.”
Cllr Simon O’Rourke said he has sat on the committee for years and reviews never happen despite complaints about the "same premises", to which Ms Hill said it's because no one has asked for a review.
She said the committee should not encourage reviews but advise residents all the information required to ask for one is on the council website.
Cllr Richard Newmark noted there have been 166 comments about issues in Whalley from residents, some of which he dubbed "horrendous", and said it was time the council said "no more" to the issues in Whalley.
Cllr Ian Brown, committee chair, added: "This report should be proof there are problems in Whalley. Something needs to be done.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel