I'm coming to the conclusion that the parliamentary draughtsman must have been channelling Lewis Carroll when he drew up the legislation.

Curiouser and curioser indeed -

I find the whole concept of "providing entertainment facilities" very odd. The intention seems to be to bring participatory singing and dancing within the Act, which would otherwise not be regulated entertainment as it is not for the entertainment of an audience. So why not simply include these in the definition of regulated entertainment?

If it was done that way, the admission would have to be made that the Act introduced for the first time the concept of the public entertaining themselves in music and dancing as licensable. Which was possibly thought a bit too controvesial to openly admit.

Ministers were briefed to say that the Act did not make licensable any activity that was not already licensable under previous legislation. This was probably true, as far as it went but it quite intentionally disguised the fact that the Act introduced the concept of making licensable any facility provided to enable the public to entertain themselves in music and dancing.

I'm also confused what is meant by "making premises available". The Guidance Notes explain that spontaneous music or dancing are not licensable because "the place where the entertainment takes place will not have been made available to those taking part for that purpose." However, unless the licensee immediately steps in to stop the singing or dancing, surely the premises have then been made available, if only by default? But since we are told spontaneous music and dancing are not licensable, why should the licensee step in to prevent it?

Again - it is probably not wise to place too much on what DCMS have placed in the S 182 Guidance. There is no specific exemption in the words of the Act for a performance of spontaneous live music so quite why this has a definition in the S 182 Guidance (when so much is left undefined) is not clear. They just keep on digging a hole of their own making, in the hope that no one will notice.

Of course it follows that the premises would have been made as much available for a peformance of spontaneous live music as they would be to enable the public to entertain themselves in any other form of music and dancing.

Spontaneous performances of live music are only not licensable on purely practical grounds, because the licensing process cannot deal with it until it occurs and it is too late when it is over. If the activity is repeated - exactly the same activity or anything provided to enable an entertainment consisting of music and dancing -becomes licensable whether paid conventional entertainment or not.