First the firemen came. They arrived in their big yellow truck armed with tape measures.
They measured the inside floor area of Tilley’s Devine Cafe Gallery in Lyneham. They measured the bar, the stage and the fixed seating, and left.
Then came the officious letter.
“”Your premises has recently been assessed by the Safety Officers from the ACT Fire Brigade and in accordance with provisions of Section 24B of the Liquor Act 1975 I have determined the occupancy loadings for each relevant public area in conformity with that assessment. The loadings are detailed below: Area A. Bar and Bistro 136 persons. Area B Outdoor Cafe 231 persons.
“”You are required to immediately comply with these occupancy limits and to advertise the set Occupancy Loading on the premises in accordance with Section 24C . . . . On receipt of this letter temporary signage is to be immediately displayed at all entrances . . . .
“”Registrar, Liquor Licensing.”
Penalties of up to $25,000 were listed.
Pauline Higgisson, the licensee of Tilley’s, was appalled. Her business was threatened. So is that of 357 other licensed premises in the ACT, she says. Tilley’s is somewhat of a test case following amendments to the Liquor Act in June. It was one of the first to be assessed under the new rules which permit only one person per square metre inside.
“”136 people is only half a house,” Ms Higgisson said yesterday. “”I have booked leading acts. It will be financially impossible to continue with the class acts we have here.”
Ms Higgisson appealed to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. At first it refused a stay pending a hearing on the merits of the assessment because the Act appeared to have only narrow grounds of review. So at the weekend only 136 people were permitted inside.
But yesterday the Government relented somewhat. It indicated to the tribunal that it was going to change the Act to make it clear that wider grounds of review are permitted. So the tribunal adjourned the case until October 12 on the undertaking that Tilley’s would have no more than 200 people inside.
But for Ms Higgisson it is only a temporary respite. She wants the whole law changed to set more reasonable limits. Under building regulations, for example, Tilley’s would be entitled to accommodate 417 people.
She wants a higher limit so she can have flexibility depending on the type of performance.
“”I have no intention of cramming people in,” she said. “”My business depends on providing reasonable comfort. A couple of weekends ago we turned away 150 people. We often have to turn people away, but 136 is ridiculous. We have had 10 years of trade with no complaint or injury. We have brought artistic quality and variety to Canberra.
“”The Government should be delighted rather than trying to annihilate us.”
Tilley’s has three exits and is on the ground floor.
“”People know when they don’t feel safe,” she said.
When the new laws were passed, they had the support of the Opposition and the independents.
The Attorney-General, Terry Connolly, told the House, “”The legislation has been prepared in close consultation with the Australian Hotels Association and persons involved in the catering and hospitality industry and police and fire authorities.”
Ms Higgisson, however, said the AHA was against the new law and an AHA witness had come to Canberra to give evidence for her.
Mr Connolly said yesterday he had met the AHA last week. The Government would not back away from imposing occupancy loadings, but he would be happy to negotiate the criteria of setting them. He had asked fire and liquor officials to look at them.
But there would be no moratorium in the meantime.
“”It is notorious that some premises pack them in like sardines on Friday and Saturday nights often in upstairs or downstairs premises,” he said. “”If there was a disaster I wouldn’t want it on my conscience.”
There had been disasters overseas and in Australia with fires, sometimes arson, at licensed premises.
The AHA argues that the new ACT law is too rigid. There is no flexibility for authorities to assess each establishment on its merit according to the design of the premises and things like stairs, exits and nature of the business. It says some premises have lost business and have cut staff. The AHA agrees with flexible safety measures.