Lapdancing club fails to get Portsmouth City Council backing
TURNED DOWN The Wiggle lapdancing club in Surrey Street
THE owner of a lapdancing club has criticised ‘small-minded’ councillors who refused his business planning permission.
Wiggle, in Surrey Street, Landport, could now be facing closure after Portsmouth City Council decided the venue – which has been open for a month – was not in a suitable location.
Members of the planning committee insisted that, although they do not favour more adult entertainment venues opening in the city, their decision was not taken for ‘moral’ reasons.
But businessman Paul Ojla, who also owns the Elegance lapdancing club and OJ’s Discounts, said he could not see any other cause to complain about Wiggle’s location.
‘It is very small-minded of them because legally, we are in the right,’ he said. ‘We have been running lapdancing clubs for 10 years and in that period we have never had any problems.
‘Even the police are happy to have lapdancing clubs because they are the least troublesome clubs there are.
‘We have installed 32 cameras inside and around the building and have bouncers on the door, so we have actually made that area safer.
‘The moral issue is the only thing that people have to complain about, but even that is going these days.
‘We will appeal the decision and I have no doubt we will win.’
Lib Dem councillor Hugh Mason admitted there was a chance the decision would be overturned on appeal, but that the committee had solid grounds for refusing permission.
He said: ‘The main reason was down to the impact on the surrounding area. This venue is in the wrong place.
‘We have a policy of concentrating our late-night venues in one part of the city. If they are spread out across Portsmouth it makes it hard for the police and they will not be able to police these night clubs effectively.’
Cllr Mason added that while he did have a moral objection to lapdancing clubs, he did not take that into account when making his decision.
The club will now remain open until Mr Ojla’s appeal against the ruling has been decided.
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Portsmouth
Friday 25 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 13 C to 25 C
Wind Speed: 22 mph
Wind direction: East
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 13 C to 23 C
Wind Speed: 24 mph
Wind direction: East
Comments
There are 24 comments to this article
Page 1 of 2
Graham Wheatley
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 09:35 AMBlackbox (22), my comment was not aimed at you in particular and what I said was 'I get the impression...'. If that impression is wrong and you (or anyone else) have genuinely suffered verbal abuse from customers of these premises, then you owe it both to yourself, and to the rest of the community, to report the matter to the police. Are they in the 'correct place'? I don't know. If you feel that they aren't, and that they shouldn't be anywhere in the city then you must vigorously question PCC as to why licenses were issued for any of them.
KB_2011
Monday, November 14, 2011 at 10:05 PMThis article is disappointingly one sided. There were a number of complaints from local residents in relation to the venue. This is not about morals, it's about the fact that the venue is poorly located and unnecessarily increases risk to young women studying in the city. Of course this shouldn't be the case but the reality is that alcohol reduces inhibition and 'punters' will leave the club having just spent hours paying women - it's not surprising they then forget that other women (who don't have the protection of all the cameras) aren't interested in being purchased. I don't know whether I agree or disagree with lapdancing clubs in general but I do believe that if we do have them they should be licenced responsibly. For me this means they should not be open late (thereby avoiding attracting people already very drunk) and should not be operated near vulnerable people and that includes students. I'm also not keen on Portsmouth becoming the strip club capital of the south. It's not a great thing to be proud of.
Blackbox
Monday, November 14, 2011 at 07:47 PMOh Graham, No I did not walk past to see what reaction I might get. In this crazy world of 2011 they allow women to work, yes even in the evenings and sadly the Surrey arms is on my way home. I admit ( as I'm sure you'll think I was 'asking for it') the incident in Guildhall walk was when I as a women was blatantly out enjoying myself with friends and even drinking some alcohol! shocker!! for some reason I thought I had the right to go out in my home town without being abused, but I expect you think I should have stayed at home in the kitchenbedroom. I work, I pay taxes, I am over 18 so I demand the right to feel safe on my own streets! (Actually I demand it whether or not I'm working and how ever old I am!) - Get over it!
Unknown85
Monday, November 14, 2011 at 04:02 PMThere is a comment suggesting that some individuals deliberately walk past such venues to see what kind of reaction they get and are surprised when their goal is realised - how can anyone even entertain the idea that any individual would walk past such an establishment hoping to be subject to sexual harrassmentviolence - such a statement is ludicrous... and at best foolish in my opinion. I do oppose the opening of this venue - for a number of reasons - I have been subject to sexual harrassment outside this venue from 'punters' leaving the premises...this was in full view of Mr Ojla and the 'security' staff who found it funny - in my opinion this clearly shows that Mr Ojla lacks the skills required to run such as establishment. I think it is inevitable that further incidents will occur and unfortunately believe it is likely they will increase in severity. Until this establishment is closed this area is a no-go area for many people - this is unfair. The establishment is directly opposite a residential block where families with small children reside I do not feel it is appropriate for small children to be exposed to the sex industry in this way - I doubt many people would be happy to have such an establishment as a view from their window or would enjoy the prospect of answering questions from inquisitive children about the establishment. The residential block in question has already seen a rise in anti social behaviour following the opening of this club. I believe the planning committee made the correct decision and I certainly hope that Mr Ojla is unsuccessful in his appeal.
Graham Wheatley
Monday, November 14, 2011 at 02:51 PMAccording to this previous item in The News on the 25th September, there were already two such establishments in the city with a 3rd (and the 2nd in Guildhall Walk) about to be licensed. Presumably those WERE in the 'correct' location otherwise they would not have been licensed in the first place? --- http:!!www.portsmouth.co.uk!news!politics!limit_to_be_set_for_number_of_lapdancing_clubs_1_3087455 (replace '!' with forward slashes due to the inability of the website to reproduce that character in uploaded comments).--- If we are content to have the existing premises in those locations, how does that fit with extending funding to improve attendance at The New Theatre Royal? Perhaps it's all 'art' and 'entertainment' and therefore should all be in the same area? --- In relation to some of the comments here, I get the impression that there are individuals who go out of their way to walk past these venues just to see what sort of a reaction they can provoke and are then surprised and upset when their goals are realised.
Charlie Dacke
Monday, November 14, 2011 at 12:28 PMI have been sexually harassed by punters of this particular club. My female friend has been solicited for a lap dance by a punter of this club. While these incidents were happeneing, the owner, Mr Ojla, was stood outside the club next to the punters and laughing at us. This is wholly unacceptable. The residents in the block opposite have submitted a petition to the Council against this club, and have reported incidents of vomiting, urinating and breaking glass by punters leaving this club. I have numerous friends that have been sexually harassed and abused by men leaving this type of club, and I have a friend who was raped by her partner when he returned home after visiting one of these clubs and was sexually charged and forced sex on her. It is a good question as to why this club was operating before planning permission was granted, and the applicant also lied on his planning application, stating that the work on the premises had not yet begun. This shows a complete lack of respect for the planning system. The harm and impact of this type of venue may not be immediately obvious, but it exists. It is actually those who fail to look outside their own limited view of what these clubs are and what they represent that are narrow minded. I cannot believe that in 2011 we still have state- condoned establishments where men go to buy women in an environment where sexual harassment is normalised. The application was refused on planning grounds (policy DC5) with regards to the already-witnessed detrimental impact this club is having. The Council would also be in breach of its duties under the Equalities Act 2010, by promoting an activity which encourages harassment and discrimnation. A legal officer from the council has commented on this, but it still seems to be widely disregarded when it comes to these venues. The Council must now form a more robust planning policy for dealing with sex establishments, and not be fearful of making decisions based on evidence and policy.
Blackbox
Saturday, November 12, 2011 at 05:49 PMPersonally as a woman living in Portsmouth I'm delighted with the councils decision. I have been subjected to verbal abuse from men leaving this club and the one in Guildhall walk, I don't want any in the wonderful city of ours. I have talked to women who work in these clubs and they are regularly abused by punters. There is far too much violence against women, in their homes and on the streets, we do not need clubs where women are treated as objects rather than the equal partners in life that they should be. How can we ever have equality in a world where men can pay to have women dance (and more) for their enjoyment. Real men respect women.
Old-Fashioned_Chair
Friday, November 11, 2011 at 05:03 PMThis club IS in the wrong place. There is a block of flats with their front door directly opposite the club. I'm sure they won't be took keen on people coming and going from a club every night. I never understand why people like Mr Ojla open something that is clearly an expensive venue before they get the permissions in place! That said, Cllr Mason is talking rubbish as per usual about his opinions - didn't take his moral objections into account? Nonsense. He is not a judge, he's a councillor. And no, I have no moral objection to lapdancing clubs whatsoever. I think they're fair game for anyone - working there or as a punter - who wants to be there.
The Watcher....
Friday, November 11, 2011 at 03:51 PMAre these the type of place where inadequate men go to when they don't have the personality to attract a woman of their own?
beiroot
Friday, November 11, 2011 at 03:41 PMDid MH declare an interest and leave the room?
RF2011
Friday, November 11, 2011 at 03:16 PM@ Vox Populi Please do have a look at the vast amounts of evidence that show the harm done to the women who work in these places. Your comment about the club not harming anyone is simply not true. The levels of abuse that these women face, the number who are on drugs and drink simply to get through the nights. The percentage who come away from these jobs with their self esteem in tatters and symptoms of PTSD. RF 2011
LukeStubbs
Friday, November 11, 2011 at 01:25 PMI was one of the minority of councillors that voted for the application: this is a building in the city centre which must be among the most suitable in Portsmouth for a late night use, so why not? Of course it needs to be run well, but that's what licensing conditions are for. What disturbed me about the meeting was that a couple of councillors seemed to say the application was OK in policy terms, but then voted against it.
Labour Insider
Friday, November 11, 2011 at 01:18 PMThe Liberal Democrats in Portsmouth as the guardians of moral values? Discuss
LI 125
Friday, November 11, 2011 at 01:02 PMIf this establishment was a Pub with music the Council could surely not refuse its application, so what is the difference here?
blue bob
Friday, November 11, 2011 at 12:59 PMI have no real interest in this club either on moral grounds or where it is situated, but the old excuse that it is desirable to have all these venues in one area to avoid trouble is flawed, the powers that be said this years ago when a lot of the clubs & bars were based on the seafront opposite the pier. Subsequent events have proved this to be unsuccessful, I don't recall many people being killed on the seafront area if any, unlike Guildhall walk, where I would have hesitation to walk on most nights.
Page 1 of 2
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.