Channel 4 withdraws objection to new pub near Leeds studio
"Agreements were reached between the applicant and objectors. As a result, the licence will now be issued," a council spokesperson saidChannel 4 moved its HQ to Leeds in 2021 and makes two daily news broadcasts from the Brewery Place site, which it has occupied since 2022.Broadcasts are delivered from the first floor directly above the planned bar.In its objection, ITN had said it would consider moving to a different location should the issue not be resolved.The pub applied to serve alcohol until 02:00 on Monday to Saturday and midnight on Sundays.According to the Local Democracy Reporting Service, ITN had commissioned a noise assessment which suggested ceiling insulation to dampen noise from inside.Noise consultancy Nova Acoustics said its assessment "suggests that if external patron noise is appropriately controlled, then the likelihood for impact is low".The report said the playing of recorded music was expected in the outside area.It said: "However, this should be limited to a background level to avoid actively encouraging patrons to raise their voices."In addition, good management of the external area will be required to avoid patrons shouting, particularly when directly outside the TV studio."Conditions already agreed with the council included no loudspeakers in use outside after 23:00 and customers being asked to keep quiet.
Listen to highlights from West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
20 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Labour thinktank offers sponsorship packages to meet and influence ‘key policymakers'
A Labour thinktank has been offering sponsorship packages where businesses can meet and influence MPs and ministers, according to a report. The Labour Infrastructure Forum (LIF) has been offering companies the chance to sponsor events at which they can meet 'key policymakers' in private and 'shape the discussion', the Times said. An LIF prospectus lists a set of sponsorship packages on offer for companies, including a £7,850 deal for a 'private breakfast/dinner roundtable with an influential Labour figure'. Other deals on offer include £11,750 for a 'parliamentary panel event with key policymakers', and between £21,500 and £30,000 for a 'Westminster drinks reception'. The prices are not inclusive of VAT. The Labour Infrastructure Forum describes itself on its website as 'a thinktank focused on getting Britain building and growing again'. It states that it wants to 'spark dialogue' between the party and 'those working across the infrastructure sector'. The thinktank was launched in September last year at an event with speeches from Darren Jones MP, the chief secretary to the Treasury, and Varun Chandra, a business adviser to Keir Starmer. It is not part of the Labour party and is not a lobbying company, which means it does not need to abide by the rules or guidance for lobbying firms or political parties. A spokesperson for the LIF told the Times that the group used sponsorship money to cover its costs and that 'any LIF activity that is supported by sponsors will be made publicly available at the time and in our annual report, as is common across the industry'. The group does not disclose its sponsors. The Labour party said it had no connection to LIF and does not endorse its activities. 'Commercial partnerships at events are a longstanding practice and have no bearing on party or government policy. The party fully complies with all rules relating to the reporting of donations,' a party spokesperson said. LIF states that its secretariat and work is supported by the lobbying company Bradshaw Advisory. The Times reported that a client of Bradshaw Advisory had been able to have a meeting last year with Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, at the Labour party conference, which has not been declared on transparency records. A Labour party spokesperson said: 'This was a meeting at party conference that was held in a political capacity. All meetings held in a ministerial capacity are declared in the proper way in full accordance with the rules.' Labour came under fire last autumn for offering company bosses breakfast with Reynolds for up to £30,000. For £15,000 plus VAT, companies were told they would get an opportunity to give a keynote speech, photographs with the business secretary and others, and a dedicated member of Labour party staff to help make introductions. For £30,000 they would also get to help decide who would attend. In the pitch, Labour's commercial team called the offer a 'unique opportunity to become a commercial partner at our business policy roundtable over breakfast'. The event ultimately did not go ahead and the party said Reynolds had been unaware of it. The Guardian reported last month that Labour MPs were alarmed at the number of sponsored corporate receptions for backbenchers that have been arranged by the party, amid concerns about perceived conflicts of interest. MPs said they had received invitations for networking receptions that include explicit advertisements for property developers or public affairs firms, sent directly from the parliamentary Labour party (PLP) office.
The Sun
20 minutes ago
- The Sun
Keir Starmer faces new sleaze row over Labour caught offering access to influential figures for cash
SIR Keir Starmer faces a new sleaze row over Labour offering access to 'influential' figures for cash. Since last summer a group linked to the party has been flogging sponsorship packages costing £9,500 to private firms. In exchange business leaders are invited to private meetings with 'key policymakers' where they can 'shape the conversation'. Sponsorship packs offered to companies include a £7,850 deal, where buyers can enjoy a 'private breakfast/dinner roundtable with an influential Labour figure'. There's also an £11,750 option to sponsor a 'parliamentary panel event with key policymakers' or £30,000 choice to pay for a 'Westminster drinks reception'. The cash for access, revealed by The Times, is organised by a group called the Labour Infrastructure Forum (LIF). Because it's run by lobbyists and a council of Labour bigwigs, but isn't itself a lobbying company, it is exempt from usual anti-sleaze rules. The organisation so far refuses to reveal which firms have signed up to its lucrative deals and who the influential Labour figures are that have taken part in back-room meet ups. A spokesperson for LIF said the group uses sponsorship cash to cover costs and 'any LIF activity that is supported by sponsors will be made publicly available at the time and in our annual report, as is common across the industry'. A Labour Party spokesman said: 'Commercial partnerships at events are a longstanding practice and have no bearing on party or government policy. The party fully complies with all rules relating to the reporting of donations.' Sir Keir Starmer red-faced AGAIN after Commons opens sleaze probe into his earnings 1
Telegraph
20 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Britain already has a de facto wealth tax
New figures from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research show that Chancellor Rachel Reeves is on course to miss her borrowing targets by over £40bn, again raising the prospect of fresh tax hikes this autumn. There are few prizes on offer for guessing where the minds of Labour MPs will turn. Yet between inheritance tax, council tax, stamp duty, capital gains, corporation tax, and the tax on interest, there is scarcely an element of an individual's portfolio which isn't in some way squeezed to fund the ever-expanding welfare state. An additional 120,000 people are predicted by HMRC to pay income tax on the interest on their savings this year, bringing the total number paying to 2.64 million. Some of this is due to higher returns; another component, however, is down to the freeze in tax thresholds, driving down the inflation adjusted value of the tax-free limit. Britain is not a country blessed with an excessive level of private savings and with the Government actively attempting to boost investment, it might be thought that penalising one of the channels through which funds can be lent to firms would be discouraged. Such analysis, however, reckons without the obsessive equalising instinct which has taken root in Westminster. With the Government apparently fixated on the curious objective of divorcing living standards from economic contributions entirely, the need for tax revenue today is taking precedence over the need to provide for tomorrow. The result of this short-sighted creation of a hostile environment for wealth will surely be to further undermine the sustainability of the public finances in the long run.
