I understand the bill has not yet been passed, and publicans have not yet been asked to apply under the new system, right? If you're talking about 5% under the old PEL system, then this would surely be because of the massive extra costs to do so, costs which no longer exist under the new system.

In the few areas where councils (unlawfully) use the current system as a 'cash cow' it certainly is a deterrent but as I pointed out, most of the PEL fees are NOT in fact set too high. For example West Dorset still charges just £60 for a full PEL. The real deterrent to a higher national take-up figure must then be another factor.

I suggest, and the licensee say - it is the hidden costs of application i.e. emergency exit lighting and other aspects that suddenly become essential when a PEL is requested. This will still be the main factor why many licensees will subject themselves to yet more contol and possible expense.

When pub owners are aware they can get something for nothing as far as entertainment licensing is concerned, I'd be amazed if those numbers didn't go up to the high 90 percents!

I hope you will be right but I doubt it and it still remains a risky gamble where we are the ones that stand to lose out. But I think even the Government would be amazed it they did reach that high a figure. They do not appear to be showing any concern if it should not do so.

But what exactly is a licensee without a PEL who has been providing currently exempt music - getting for nothing?
Well exactly what they were getting for nothing before - as long as they now pass the inspection with no additional and expensive conditions being imposed on activities which were always perfectly safe. Always assuming of course that they in fact apply.....

Isn't this the point? If every pub owner gets a Premises License "for free", ALL premises will become available for music-making. No more restriction of sessions, no more crack-downs from petty bureaucrats.

Then why take the gamble, why on earth make application for entertainment OPTIONAL????????

It will not be for free, as all pubs will be paying more for the new Personal Licence, the Premises Licence and the annual inspection charge - just to enable them to serve alcohol. The only places that will pay less overall are those who currently pay over the top for PELs. However, a lot of these are dancing nightclubs which only have a PEL to enable them to open late and do not provide any live music at all.

Granted, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the PRS sent round a "scare" letter to pubs with the entertainment element of the license. Organisations like this tend to do things like that.

The highest PRS fees are for live music so any pub that has applied to provide it, will get a vist from the PRS first. So by making the application the licensee is saying 'come and get me'.

Do you really still think 90% is likely? Even if you should be right, that still leaves 10% where one person singing is an offence. Do pubs really need to go through all the hassle, just to have us playing in them and will they be prepared to do so for more pain and very little gain?

If all pubs were now to be made safe for entertainment, the figure would be 100% and any figure less that this is incompetence on behalf of the Department of Culture, Media and Sport.

Some form of live entertainment (if limited) can take place now in ALL 100% of our licensed premises - instead if improving the scope of this entertainment - this Department will have gambled and suceeded in placing this all at risk - and why?