The fact that this opposition has been expressed 'in a forthright manner' to DCMS [ICO decision, para 59] tends to reinforce concerns that prejudice and resistance to change underpins their position.

The stated grounds and concerns that the LGA Group use in their active opposition to any proposed exemptions are equally applicable to the many (and often illogical) existing exemptions already contained in the Licensing Act 2003 - to which the LGA Group do not activly oppose and which have not been shown to menace the public.

Producing the requested information is the only one way that the ICO, LGA, DCMS could demonstrate that the LGA Group's continuing, active and seemingly automatic opposition to any propsed exemptions is NOT due to prejudice and resistance to change.

The extent of their reluctance to do this is probably answer enough.

Sadly this and my personal experience shows that the safeguards and appeals (such as those under the FOI Act and Local Government Ombudsman) that should enable the public to be treated fairly contain far too many opportunities for the offending authority to not only maintain their original positions but to be able to launch personal attacks on members of the public trying to use the process for its stated pupose.

This only proves, if proof was neeeded, that considerable power is exerted in licensing matters (both nationally and locally) by those who are not prepared to be held to account for their actions. Until this is changed to enable open examination by the public - should we be surprised if prejudice (and possobly even worse factors) continue to be responsible for some of the actions that affect us all?