Licensing Act 2003 (Mandatory Licensing Conditions) (Amendment) Order 2026
House of Lords · Grand Committee · 2 Sep 2026 · 14 speeches · Official Report
Considered in Grand Committee
Moved by
That the Grand Committee do consider the Licensing Act 2003 (Mandatory Licensing Conditions) (Amendment) Order 2026 Relevant document: 9th Report from the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee
My Lords, the Licensing Act 2003 (Mandatory Licensing Conditions) (Amendment) Order 2026 was laid before the House on 30 June. This instrument makes a focused amendment to the mandatory licensing conditions for alcohol sale and supply in England and Wales. It will allow licensed premises and club premises with a certificate to accept digital proof of age through a digital verification service that has been independently assessed against the UK’s DVS trust framework and is listed on the statutory DVS register, provided the order’s safeguards and any relevant local licensing conditions are met. In doing so, it removes a legal barrier created by conditions drafted when secure digital verification was not available while leaving the wider licensing regime unchanged. Currently, anyone asked to prove their age when buying alcohol must produce a physical document bearing a photograph and date of birth with either a holographic mark or an ultraviolet feature, such as a passport or driving licence. I assure the Committee that physical documents remain valid: the order does not require individuals to use digital proof of age or businesses to accept it; it simply provides an additional voluntary route where equivalent safeguards are in place. The Committee will recognise that people increasingly expect to provide and prove information securely and digitally. As many do not routinely carry valuable documents such as passports or driving licences, providing a trusted digital alternative...
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering
My Lords, I thank the Minister for presenting this SI and for continuing the work that the previous Government started. I declare my interests in that I was chair of the Select Committee that reviewed the Licensing Act 2003 and I currently chair the National Proof of Age Standards Scheme board. I also thank the Minister for meeting me yesterday; it was extremely helpful and I am grateful to have had that opportunity. I welcome the regulations before us this afternoon, both personally and as chair of the Proof of Age Standards Scheme board. It is particularly appropriate, for the reasons that the Minister has set out, that physical cards will exist alongside the digital dPass. As a community interest company, PASS places the interests of young people at the heart of everything we do. We are mindful of the fact that, during Covid, there were not many options or opportunities open to young people to access cinemas, bars, restaurants or indeed any aspects of the night-time economy in general. We therefore welcome the regulations and wish to see them implemented but, as was the case with the Licensing Act 2003, the key to proper implementation will be how Section 182 guidance is drafted. In that regard, I will write giving fuller detail, but I would like to raise a number of issues this afternoon. A particular concern is the potential weakening of PASS’s established recognition in the Section 182 guidance. I seek an assurance from the Minister and the department that cards...
Finally, the Minister referred to a key aspect of the new regulations and dPass going forward: it remains the retailer’s responsibility to ensure that no under-age sales take place. I am very grateful to the WSTA-the Wine and Spirit Trade Association- which is a member of PASS and has written to me separately, as it raised a specific instance in this regard.
One other issue I would raise, which the Minister referred to, is training. It is absolutely imperative that the retailers are allowed enough time to train the staff. The Minister will be aware-his own department has the figures-of the number of violent incidences that take place at the point of sale when the sale is prevented because age is unable to be verified or the identity proved.
The legal clarity offered by the legislation is, of course, welcome, but there are significant implementation considerations for retailers, and there will be a cost to contracting providers or building in-house DPoA systems at scale. Retailers will be required to ensure that they comply with the wider licensing obligations in operating digital proof of age-for example, ensuring that sales are not made to intoxicated persons, which is already a crime, and that proxy sales are not taking place. This means that human interaction could still be required in a significant number of transactions in addition to general consumer familiarisation with the digital proof of age process at the point of sale.
As I referred to, because of the current environment of heightened retail crime and staff safety concerns, limiting staff customer friction at the point of sale will be a key concern for retailers. Many of these practical considerations will be clarified in the updated Licensing Act Section 182 guidance, and it would be helpful to know what that might be in advance and the date of publication of the legislation coming into force. I just make a final plea to the Minister that government communications have regard to and support retailers in this transition.
My Lords, I must begin by saying that the order seems to be a bit of a relic of history. The Government have outlined how they believe it aims to modernise alcohol sales by allowing digital identification for the purposes of age verification at the point of sale. On several occasions, I have had an argument with the Minister about what we on this side view as the folly of digital ID cards. We disagree on the merits of their policy but, given that he has so vociferously defended the introduction of digital ID and given that the new Prime Minister has scrapped the policy, where does the Minister stand now? More importantly for this debate, what precisely is this order now standing on? The entire proposal behind it depends on functioning digital identification, yet the new Government have abandoned their own digital ID proposals, which, incidentally, I am delighted about. Parliament is being asked to approve secondary legislation built on an assumption of infrastructure that the Government themselves have just walked away from. This all begs the question: how will this now work? How will retailers use digital verification if there is no digital identification system being produced by the Government? It would be particularly useful if the Minister could answer that. I press the Minister on two further points. First, if a supermarket chain moves towards a QR code verification as its default, what protection exists for those, often older, customers who are unable or unwilling to...
My Lords, one has to love the noble Lord. The opposition spokesman starts talking about the potential challenges in this policy, but I remind him that the consultation took place between January and March 2024, when the Government of which he was a supporter was in office. So, by all means, have a little kick-about on this point but, ultimately, the Government are trying to make a provision that makes it easier for consumers, easier for businesses, and does not do what he has alleged that we are trying to do-stop the use of physical means of identity. I was clear in my opening comments about the existing use of physical identification. If someone wants to go out on a Saturday night with their passport in their pocket, they can do so. If it meets the criteria that we have set under the scheme that is already in operation, they can do so. Nobody is going to stop them doing that. We would hope, self-evidently, that people might think that carrying a passport on a Saturday night might not be a good idea, as it could be lost, because it is a physical document that has great value in terms of political capital and in terms of cost of replacement. So a digital scheme could be used. Again, the noble Lord challenges me and says, “Well, isn’t it terrible that the Government have abandoned their digital ID scheme?” The changes operational here are completely separate to the proposals for a national digital ID scheme. Again, I emphasise to the noble Lord that there is no compunction on...
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering
I am grateful to the Minister for responding on the point about of Section 182 guidance not, at this stage, being amended for physical sales-that is greatly appreciated from the PASS point of view-but he did not address the issue that retailers in the wine and spirit trade have raised, and I am sure that convenience stores would have similar issues. When will the Section 182 guidance be amended for digital proof of age at the point of sale? We want to make it go smoothly and make sure that there are no altercations and no threats to staff at the point of sale.
I appreciate that. I cannot give the date when this will be implemented. The points the noble Baroness made around training and the need to prepare are valid. We do not have a commencement date yet. My understanding is that this order will go to the House of Commons on Monday next week. Ministers, including the direct Minister responsible, who is in the department, and not me in this case, will take a decision on that. The factors that she has mentioned are important, and I will ensure that no immediate change will be made to Section 182 guidance without further engagement with PASS. We have the ability to implement this order in an ordered way, and I will reflect on what the noble Baroness said, and if I am able to give further information post the letter, I will do so.
Motion agreed.