'That members confirm that steps taken by Licensing Officers to encourage an application from the proprietor of the Cove House Inn, Portland, for a Licence permitting public entertainment on the premises were appropriate and justified'

This was what the members were asked to do. Not too suprising that they did just that, if you read Hamish's report (above)? The meeting was not to determine any key legal points such as "whether the law should be applied not whether it was being broken". The law had been applied.

My original request was that the members looked at the future of traditional music events in the light of the policy that the officers had made for them and the public of Weymouth and Portland.

The events and the officer's 'fairy story' given in their report for the meeting, of how things happened, is the subject of a complaint, which will most probably finish up with the local government ombudsman.

No "formal complaint" was ever made against the session. WPBC have admitted that.

There have been conflicting explanations as to how the officers came to visit, the one they seem now to have settled is this undated unrecorded anonymous complaint to unlicensed events, which there is no evidence that it ever existed, from unidentified presumed licensee. Why would you "believe" any of this and why would you state here that this was in any shape or form to be considered a "formal complaint"?

There is acording to WPBC's latest information, only one officer, the Licensing Manager who could have actually visited the event. The whole issue is based one that expressed and unchallenged opinion as the the nature of the event. My opinion, that it was not a public entertainment provided by the licensee, is as valid as hers, that it was.

Please do not assume that what your hear an officer of WPBC say, is the whole truth.