Greg Mulholland MP

FOI reveals that the Government response on pubcos is actually the work of the pubcos representative organisation, the BBPA!

The All Party Parliamentary Save the Pub Group have today revealed that following their Freedom of Information request, it has become apparent that much of the Governments so called 'industry response' is the direct work of the British Beer and Pub Association (BBPA), who represent the pub companies and who were heavily criticised in the Business Innovation and Skills Select Committee report, with sections of the response resembling a BBPA report presented to the Department for Business Innovation and Skills, word for word.

It was already apparent that the Department for Business Innovation and Skills engaged the pub companies, and the BBPA who represent the pub companies, in secret negotiations, behind the backs of tenants and lessee organisations who make up the other side of this trade dispute.

The BBPA presented a report to BIS on 21st October and the Government response is basically the provisions contained it. Significant sections of their Government response are very similar to the BBPA report, indeed much of it word for word - showing that BIS officials simply cut and pasted the BBPA's view and presented it as the Department's.

This collusion was made all to evident be the fact the BBPA were working with the BIS press office on their press release as early as October 31^st, three weeks ahead of the Government response and just five weeks after the Select Committee report was published.

The Save the Pub Groups FOI request has also brought to light evidence of wholly inappropriate relationships between BIS officials and the BBPA, with BIS officials effectively using the BBPA as an adviser on issues and taking that advice, despite the fact that the BBPA represent the pubcos and that their position is vehemently opposed by the majority of pub industry organisations. BIS officials continually go back to the BBPA to either reject other views (proposing something the pubcos will not do or accept or criticisms of the pubcos and BBPA position) and then have accepted whatever the BBPA have told them. Most seriously, BIS appear to have accepted the BBPA's own questionable legal advice on the issue of making Codes of Practice legally binding without proper scrutiny.

The key findings of the FOI response are as follows:

• That the Government response is basically British Beer & Pub Association's (BBPA) own report, with some passages and so called commitments cut and pasted word for word. The British Beer & Pub Association are the representative organisation of the pubcos and large brewers. So the Government response in actually the pubcos response, which is appalling.

• That there has been a wholly inappropriate relationship between BIS officials and the BBPA. BIS officials, as well as being worryingly close to the BBPA and their lobbyists, sought advice from the BBPA for their advice on issues then took it, without any scrutiny and without consulting the licensee and consumer groups.

• That the Minister (Ed Davey) and officials had been holding secret negotiations with the BBPA and its pubco members, without the knowledge of the Committee or most industry organisations, including licensee groups. The Ministers first response to the Select committee report was to convene a meeting of the very people so heavily criticised in the report - Enterprise Inns, Punch Taverns and the BBPA and not the IPC, who represent tenants and lessees - a very odd thing to do.

• That the Minister had already made up his mind, before the BIS Select Committee report came out, that he would not consider legislation (despite clear commitments he and Vince Cable had made). He made clear at the meeting on 12 October with Enterprise, Punch and the BBPA that he still wanted to pursue self regulation and then officials worked with the BBPA and pubcos to circumvent the Select Committee recommendations, despite having previously backed them.

• That BIS officials were assisting the BBPA with the wording of a press release as early as the end of October a wholly inappropriate thing to do. This means that BIS officials were helping BBPA with their release on what was later presented as the Govt response, a full 3 weeks before the Government published its response and only 5 weeks after the Select Committee report. It also shows clearly that the BBPA knew exactly what the Government response was going to be, 3 weeks before its publication, despite assurances that no organisation had seen the response before publication. For some reason, this was then not issued, but the BBPA then carelessly issued their release on the morning the Government response was published before it was actually published, again confirming that they knew what was in it - because they had virtually written it.

• There was no 'tough negotiation' on the part of the Minister and officials. Indeed the BBPA's own report and legal advice were very largely accepted, virtually in their entirety - without critique or additional, independent advice being sought with only the occasional query which, having had the BBPA's response, was then forgotten about.

• The BBPA have misled the Government into believing that their partners have signed up to the proposals that they put forward to the Minister. However, the ALMR, the GMV have made clear they did not agree to these proposals. This means the BBPA have put something to the Government which is untrue, which is serious and may need further investigation. BIS officials were also negligent in their job, but not checking this - and instead simply copying this information into the Government response.

Chair of the Save the Pub Group, Greg Mulholland commented:

"The Freedom of Information request put in by the Save the Pub Group has been extremely revealing, not least in confirming our concerns that the Government's response stemmed from secret negotiations with the pubcos representative organisation, the British Beer and Pub Association and the pub companies themselves.

"However much more seriously, it is now become apparent that the Government response is basically British Beer & Pub Association's (BBPA) own report, with some passages and so called commitments cut and pasted word for word. So in reality, the so called Government response in actually the pubcos response, which is appalling.

"There are also serious questions about the way BIS officials have worked with the BBPA. The fact that BIS officials were assisting the BBPA in writing their press release on the 31^st October, just five weeks after the Select Committee report and three weeks ahead of the Governments response, really demonstrates the way in which so called 'Government solution' was put together".

"The claim that this is an industry agreed solution is nonsense; it has become clear that despite the claims of the BBPA that the report had been agreed by partners, including the GMV and the ALMR, this was not the case. The Save the Pub Group have had confirmation from both the GMV and the ALMR that they never approved a final report. The BBPA therefore appear to have sought to mislead the Minister then BIS officials have not even checked this, merely included it in their report. That is a shoddy way of working.

Green Party MP and Save the Pub Group member, Caroline Lucas said:

"It now clear that the Minister, Ed Davey, had already made up his mind and was not going to take any notice of the select committee report and was not going to introducing a statutory code, despite previous commitments made by him and Vince Cable."

Labour MP and Save the Pub Group member, Kate Hoey said:

"Sadly it now clear that the Minister had already made up his mind and was not going to take any notice of the select committee report and was not going to introducing a statutory code, despite previous commitments made by him and Vince Cable.

There certainly wasn't any tough negotiation. It is very revealing that the first act of the Minister following the publication of the Select Committee report was to convene a meeting with the BBPA and pub companies, the very people so heavily criticised in the Select Committee report.

Greg Mulholland concluded:

"The Save the Pub Group still believe that the only solution that will deal with the fundamental imbalance between pubco and licensee is a genuine free of tie option with open market rent review. Only this would stop the pubcos taking more than is fair or sustainable from pubs. Without this licensees will continue to fail and pubs that need not close will close. Sadly the Government's BBPA inspired response will do nothing to address that"

END