Nightclub is a scapegoat’ for problems in the area
PUBLISHED: 11:56 09 November 2006 | UPDATED: 14:54 12 May 2010
HAVING kept a close eye on events surrounding the Nu nightclub in Royston, I felt compelled to express an opinion. I can t help but sympathise with the proprietors of Nu. After resurrecting the ailing nightclub it has, seemingly, become a scapegoat for m
HAVING kept a close eye on events surrounding the Nu nightclub in Royston, I felt compelled to express an opinion.
I can't help but sympathise with the proprietors of Nu. After resurrecting the ailing nightclub it has, seemingly, become a scapegoat for many of the problems already subsisting at the late hours of the weekend.
Anti-social behaviour and social disorder have long been rife and the opening of Nu can't possibly be held responsible for exacerbating a problem which has haunted the town for so many years.
I suspect it would be too easy for those pointing the finger to look towards the excessive and expansive town population increase as a potential cause for the problems propounded.
For a town with "too many people with too little to do" it could, perhaps, be argued that premises such as Nu are exactly what the community needs.
For a town which has grossly outgrown it's ever-declining ability to provide for it's socio-leisure demand, the Nu nightclub provides a safe, well-managed and welcoming location for locals to enjoy their evening to the full extent of the recently-extended licensing laws.
Furthermore, the club's success to date is testament to the dedication of it's owners; two life-long members of the community with the entrepreneurial spirit to give something back.
It seems a great shame that the continued operation of the club is being presented with so many obstacles, often with little or no culpability proportional to the club itself.
Wouldn't it be refreshing if those so quick to criticise the town's provision of entertainment facilities (or lack thereof) were as quick and vociferous in their response to defend Nu and it's hardworking and conscientious management team.
WELL done the Royston Crow (November 2) for printing the statement from Nu nightclub giving the other side of the story.
It seems any disturbance that occurs in the Market Hill area is blamed on the nightclub and the 19 crimes and 45 incidents recorded by the police in the last 10 months in the area included lost or stolen coats, keys and mobile phones.
How many involved violence and disorder directly attributable to the nightclub?
Has the Nu nightclub's opening hours been cut because of recent incidents or because the police do not have enough officers to cover the Royston area at night?
Perhaps they should be closing premises in Hitchin if there is more trouble there. I hope no-one has a burglary in the early hours, all the police will be in other more important towns. After a recent incident in Royston it took 30 minutes for one police officer to arrive and 45 minutes for more officers to arrive - from Hertford.
I believe the nightclub provides a much-needed venue for the many young people in Royston. The majority of them just want to meet, have a drink, dance and enjoy themselves.
If further licensing restrictions are imposed, the club might close resulting in more young people on the streets with nowhere to go and nothing to do. Oh, haven't we been here before?
NAME and ADDRESS SUPPLIED
. . . but it should operate within the rules of licence
I WAS absolutely appalled at the statement by the owners of the Nu nightclub published in The Crow last week, and anyone who has read the detailed representations made to the licensing committee by the police and residents will know that this club has been badly managed in the past with serious consequences for all those affected by it.
Previously, it was quite usual for people living in the centre of Royston to be regularly and repeatedly disturbed at any time up to 4am by the drunken and loutish behaviour of people leaving this club.
I'm certain that this wasn't the intention when the Licensing Act 2003 was passed and whatever the club may claim, the fact is that since its forcible closure this nuisance has almost completely ceased.
In these circumstances I would suggest that it would be well advised to concentrate on operating within the revised terms of its licence rather than seeking to portray itself as a victim.
NAME and ADDRESS SUPPLIED