Is it rather too easy to critcise the apirations of the poor chap who lies down in front of a tank?

The driver of the tank has only one duty and responsibility and can be excused (to some extent), if they run over our chap and his aspirations.

I suggest it would be better for us to address and critcise those who have the power to call off the tanks.

For our local authority officers are charged with many, often conflicting responsibilities, but many choose to claim the law means they have to drive right over people and their aspirations, as in this case.

The fact that it 'sounded like a public entertainment', was enough for the officers to try to entrap them as providing this, rather than aiding what would have been a great asset to the local public they are employed to serve.

The same attempt is being made to class unpaid informal sessions like those examples above, when the interpretation of the one law that the officers are using in isolation, has not been tested in Court. In the case of my council, for the officers even to tell the members that the law is clear!

The questions to be answered are:

Is the public well served by this strict enforcement of licensing legislation, in isolation of all of the council's other reponsibilities?

And how did it get this late?

If it is thought that the proposed reforms will change this, I see nothing in the White Paper that states exactly what measures are to be introduced to prevent this unbalanced, over-zealous approach and abuse of power entrusted to the employees of our local authorities.

It is the long entrenched power of these individuals that we must place under the control and wishes of the public they are paid to serve.