Many moons ago, when I started using pubs, they more or less came in two types: they were big,
sometimes posh and served food or they were small and concentrated on beer. Over the last few years London has seen a significant change in its beer drinking venues. Many smaller breweries now have taprooms and the number is increasing as breweries expand (see the news of both Sambrook’s and Truman’s elsewhere). We also have the growth of the micropub sector. Neither of these trends is exclusive to London, I know, but they are having an effect here more than in most places.
How do these new style venues fit in with our existing pub stock and do they represent a threat? These days, most of the big pubs still serve food and not only does that keep them viable but, with companies like Fuller’s and Young’s, it is now very much their raison d’etre. Restaurant closures are running high (for example the Jamie Oliver chain) and so it may well be that ‘dining pubs’ are filling – or arguably creating – the gap. JD Wetherspoon pubs have a particular identity and I think can be regarded as being in their own category; they certainly have their place. What then however about the remaining ‘wet led’ houses, which rely principally on alcohol sales? Micropubs are, by definition, small and have limited opening hours while tap rooms are not open regularly. We need our beer pubs.
Unfortunately, the traditional wet-led pubs are the ones most likely to be under threat, and not just from developers. These pubs used to be largely the province of tenants, publicans who leased the pub from the owners (originally a brewery, now a pub owning business – POB) as their own business as opposed to being a manager employed directly by the POB. Most are however ‘tied’ by those owners, i.e. they are obliged to buy their beer (and sometimes other stock) from the POB and often at more than twice the price they could otherwise be paying. Tenants were supposed to receive a measure of protection against such extortion from the Pubs Code when it was introduced in 2016. The guiding principle was that tied tenants should be no worse off than if they were not subject to the tie. As you will see from page 18, this hasn’t quite been the case. At the same time, POBs are seeking to convert tenancies to managed houses by either ‘buying out’ tenants (and in many cases you cannot blame the latter for taking the money and running) or, through the use of devices such as Landlord and Tenant Act Section 25 notices, just throwing them out. Another complication is that tenants usually prefer to live above the pub but, in so many cases, the landlord’s accommodation has been converted to flats.
So why does the Campaign for Real Ale campaign for pubs? Real ale is a bulk product; it will always be best where it is sold in large volumes at competitive prices. In this respect, exploited tied tenants can hardly compete with brewery taps, let alone Wetherspoons. As consumers we need the Pubs Code to work as it was intended if we are to continue to enjoy the quality of service that tenanted pubs have traditionally provided. Pubs are a vital part of our social infrastructure, for want of a better word. We need to keep our pubs open and thriving and we need make no apologies for campaigning to do so.
Tony Hedger