Thanks to David Heath for his question in the Commons about two-in-a-bar and for the commitment to 'keep plugging away on this'.

But let's not forget what New Labour proposed in their licensing White Paper. It is not a panacea: the two-in-a-bar rule will be abolished - but that simply means there will be NO exemptions for live music. Even one singer in a bar will first require local authority approval. The White Paper carried a risk assessment that musicians could actually LOSE work as a result (p67).

Licensing lawyers, who already have serious reservations about transfering responsibility for liquor licensing to local authorities, agree that unless local authorities curb their over-zealous enforcement policies the White Paper's proposals could make things worse for live music.

Why can't we have the licensing regime now operating in Scotland? No PEL required there for on-licensed premises putting on bands during permitted hours. No criminal offence, no performer limit, no fee payable to the licensing authority.

The health and safety and noise legislation that regulates Scottish pubs is the same as in England.

Realistically we are not going to see new primary legislation for 3 years. The squeeze on local gigs has been going on for almost 20 years. It is as bad as it has ever been, and it's getting worse. It is totally unacceptable that such a long-running, ludicrous restriction on live music should exist for a minute longer, let alone three more years. Musicians and licensees continue to report two-in-a-bar enforcement problems in Camden, Westminster, Islington, Southwark, Norwich, Ely, Oxford, Bristol, Portland, Sheffield, Waltham Abbey, and Brighton. Only a couple of weeks ago a three-quarter page feature appeared in the Brighton Argus, claiming that the council there was 'squeezing the lifeblood out of the live music scene' with its PEL enforcement policy.

Local authorities could transform the opportunities for local live gigs NOW - if they abolished PEL fees and conditions for small-scale gigs in bars and other on-licensed premises. The grant of a PEL allowing informal jazz and folk sessions could be an almost automatic consequence of having obtained a liquor licence.

PEL fees are entirely at local authorities' discretion, and they have statutory duties under separate legislation to ensure public safety and control noise in this category of premises.

But they will not do this unless they come under strong pressure from the DCMS, the department with responsibility for PEL policy. And the DCMS will never apply that pressure unless it becomes convinced (through representations by performers and their unions) that the problem is severe and widespread - because it would mean confronting the Local Government Association and their publicly declared opposition to low, centrally-set licence fees.