Educate or Revocate?
The Rainbow, a popular nightclub in Digbeth, has had its license revoked due to two deaths in two years relating to narcotics. Dylan Booth died after attending a New Years Eve event in 2015 because he consumed a class A pill. In 2017, around Halloween, Michael Trueman took MDMA, where he then later died. Both of whom were aged under 20.
Birmingham has roughly 3,000 nightclubs, none of which have experienced what The Rainbow has. The question now is, can we educate the youth about the dangers that lie behind drug taking at venues or is revocation the only option left?
The Licensing Act 2003 has four statutory objectives that all licensed venues must abide by to remain open to the public: 1. The Prevention of Crime and Disorder 2. Public Safety 3. The Prevention of Public Nuisance 4. The Protection of Children from Harm
With a club like Rainbow, all four objectives are relevant to the premises’ license. The two examples above relate to crime and disorder as well as public safety. The noise pollution that a venue of 11 different rooms must create, can be a cause of public nuisance, and under 18-year-old’s sneaking past security or showing a fake ID can be applied to protecting children.
During the New Years Eve event in 2015, The Rainbows event manual stated that 78 Security Industry Authority (SIA) staff should have been working that night, but only 38 turned up. This could have meant that body searches were not happening properly and the venue was not being guarded the way it should have been. Since this incident, new drugs policies and undercover SIA staff have been introduced to the venue. Random searches in socks, shoes, bags and belts and staff have been drugged trained by the West Midland Police. These new improvements have had a positive impact on the way the venue had been run during 2016 according to PC Ben Reader.
But less than two years later another youngster died for the same reason. Can we blame the venue for this tragedy after they introduced all of these new protocols in order to abide by the four objectives stated by the licensing act? I can see both sides of the argument.
People hide drugs in very intimate places and you can not strip search everyone who enters a club, it would be impossible. Perhaps introducing guarded toilets to prevent the use of selling and taking drugs as this is the easiest place to get away with it. But still, people will find a way to consume them. Closing down one of the biggest clubs in Birmingham, may not be the answer to death by drugs either. Inexperienced teenagers are going to go somewhere else, potentially a lot more dangerous and have no idea what people their mixing with or what drugs their taking. Revoking the license of a premises that was following the rules as best as they could, might have been a huge mistake.
However, the club now has a reputation among non-clubbers about being a dangerous and drug infested place. The families of these two boys are grieving and to see the place where their sons died closing down, it may be a positive outcome for them. But public safety and prevention of crime and disorder are key objectives to a licensed venue and these were not fully addressed the nights these boys died.
Overall, drug taking within music venues is becoming an increasing problem, and it can sometimes be impossible to prevent it. In my opinion, closing down this nightclub was the wrong thing to do, educating youngsters or addressing the penalty for being in possession of the drugs should be the action taking place. Closing down the venue for all of its users has affected the nightlife economy in Birmingham. #educatenotrevocate
