Not sure about that, LG, but the enforcement officers could certainly visit every day, gain evidence of contravention and simply issue a summons for each transgression. I also think that issuing fixed penalties (or summonses to persistent offenders) to the establishments' customers will have an effect. It is unlikely that they (either the proprietors or customers) will be fined the maximum amount (especially if they plead guilty) but the court would take into account their finances and should impose increasing fines as the offences persist.
There seems to be no will to properly enforce the law if there is the faintest hint that "minorities" of one sort or another are involved. Instead of whinging, whining, ringing his hands and making inaccurate statements Councillor Karney would do better to consult the council’s legal advisors and get the matter dealt with under the existing law. The trouble is that enforcement officers are being asked to deal with what is, for them, an unprecedented problem and it seems they lack the nous to think beyond their usual processes and procedures.
The 2006 Act makes no distinction between licensed and unlicensed premises. In fact, as I said, no types of premises are specifically mentioned at all. Councils have seen fit to use licensing as a weapon against persistent offenders because it suits them and it’s easy meat. But they have an obligation to properly enforce the law in all premises covered by the Act.