Licensing consultation announced!

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 30 Jun 10 - 05:27 PM

The Coalition Agreement specifically states that the new government will "cut red tape to encourage the performance of more live music". I questioned ministers about this commitment only last week, and their aim remains to bring about changes as quickly as possible. That's why I am confident that, very soon, British musical talent will be flourishing in small venues once more.


http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20114&utm_source=tweet&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitter

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 26 Jun 10 - 05:34 PM

The following from Phil Little.

Live Music Petition: Waiting for Downing Street's permission to deliver the petition. Presentation group; myself, HB two Lords and an MP.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 24 Jun 10 - 04:43 PM

http://www.musicweek.com/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=1041612&c=1

12:28 | Tuesday June 22, 2010
By Robert Ashton
The Live Music Forum has written to the chair of the UK Statistics Authority to complain that the DCMS is being misleading about the data it has on live music.

The LMF and a number of other live music supporters is asking the UKSA to make an assessment on the statistics that the Government is using to underpin its report, Live Music: An Analysis Of The Sector.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: IanC
Date: 24 Jun 10 - 03:55 AM

Surely the "broader solution" can only be to repeal the whole of the entertainments provision in the licensing act, leaving us with a situation as in Scotland.

This is what we should now be campaigning for.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 24 Jun 10 - 03:19 AM

My concern is that my hon. Friend's proposal goes for a particular solution when there might be a broader and potentially more radical solution that should also be considered.
Yes

Do I detect a move toward yet more consultation?

As it would seem difficult enough to implement a solution that all parties to the present coalition Government are agreed on and which has already been subject to many delays and a consultation - perhaps it would be better to proceed with this NOW!

Whatever this more broader and possibly more radical solution may be, the idea of yet more delay with the possible outcome that it may be considered too broad and too radical, is not one to be risked.

Implement what has been agreed and then a move towards a broader and more radical solution can be given whatever time that such a solution may need. Whatever this solution might be?

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: Leadfingers
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 07:17 PM

And DONT hold your breath on any change !!

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: Leadfingers
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 07:07 PM

400

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 06:54 PM

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2010-06-21a.5.0&s=speaker%3A10288#g5.5

John Whittingdale (Maldon, Conservative)

Is my hon. Friend aware that the unanimous recommendation of the Select Committee-that there should be an exemption for smaller venues of a capacity below 200-was supported by the previous Government, who were intending to introduce a regulatory order to provide an exemption for venues of a capacity below 150, and that there was widespread disappointment that that was not done? Will he confirm that he sees no need for any further consultation and that he will move to introduce the necessary order as soon as possible?

John Penrose (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport; Weston-Super-Mare, Conservative)

My concern is that my hon. Friend's proposal goes for a particular solution when there might be a broader and potentially more radical solution that should also be considered. If we go for other alternatives, we will need to consult on them, but if we decide to go down the route of ideas that have already been thoroughly canvassed, I would obviously want to move as fast as possible and reduce the level of consultation to the bare legal minimum.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 06:51 PM

http://www.culture.gov.uk/consultations/7150.aspx#a

Govt publishes responses to the consultation to exempt small scale events from the Licensing Act.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 10:08 AM

http://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/downloads/page3026/Allithwaite_CE_Primary_School.pdf

Licensing of live music in primary schools (despite DCMS denials) really is THRIVING.

A sure fire way of bulking up DCMS live music 'statistics'.

By including in their statistics, all the applications from premises like these schools that the Licensing Act has now made neccessary - DCMS advise Ministers, who advise us, that an increase in application = an increase in live music.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 10:02 AM

http://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/downloads/page3026/Stramongate_School,_Kendal.pdf

Stramongate Primary School - licence for choir practice, a film licence for watching a DVD in assembly and other trivial activities.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 10:00 AM

http://www2.canterbury.gov.uk/committee/Data/Licensing%20Sub%20Committee/20070717/Agenda/Agenda%20Enclosure%208.pdf

John King comments:

Here we have Blean Primary School which has been saddled with restrictions on their premises licence for dancing and music. Even in the assembly hall. These bizarre restrictions were enforced as a result... of - yet again - ONE complaint from a neighbour.

http://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/downloads/page3411/Hawkshead__Esthwaite_Primary_School.pdf

Licensing of live music in primary schools is THRIVING.

Hawkshead Esthwaite Primary School. Premises licence granted for two performances of Christmas productions during assembly. Entertainment facilities for rehearsals and music... lessons have also been licensed.

Well done to the LGA for blocking Licensing Act reform.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 09:48 AM

Ooops!

http://www.actonw3.com/default.asp?section=info&page=egandd01.htm

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 09:47 AM

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 03:12 AM

Seems similar to what happened to the George and Dragon in Acton which was an established music venue, albeit rock, not folk.

The problems arose when the old co-op store site was redeveloped into yuppie gated luxury apartments to which the buyers objected to the sound bleed, and got the venue closed down. I know it was awfully inconsiderate to build, more than 300 years ago, on a site next to where there would be luxury apartments.....

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 05:38 AM

http://newsfrombrighton.co.uk/brighton-pub-reviews/the-freebutt-hit-by-closure-threat/

Brighton and Hove City Council have threatened to enfore a current noise abatement order on the venue, which is located near to Phoenix Brighton, which would hinder the prospect of live music at the venue in the future.

A press release from the owners explains: "Despite constant attempts to fix the problems and come to an agreement on how to move forward, owners now appear to have reached a dead end with council officials, after asking for some reasonable time to sort out the alleged sound issues which they had previously been told to do nothing about. This could lead not only to the closing of a historic venue but the loss of 15 creative jobs in the city and a dent in tourism figures after what owners believe to be a series of Environmental Health Department blunders."

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 05:35 AM

http://www.ism.org/news_campaigns/article/live_music_bill_must_be_passed_as_soon_as_possible/

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 05:31 AM

Lord Shutt of Greetland (Deputy Chief Whip, House of Lords; Liberal Democrat)

My Lords, my noble friend may well be right about that. I am afraid that I have no news about any timescale for such a Bill.

Trust in the words of Lib Dems?

http://www.thestage.co.uk/features/feature.php/28030/cultivating-culture

So we'll exempt small venues with capacities of less than 200 and go back to the rule where any venue can put on a performance of un-amplified music by one or two people without a licence. That is how we can foster new talent and new community venues. And Liberal Democrats recognise how extraordinarily competitive careers in performance and the arts can be, and how many of the people working in them are struggling.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 17 Jun 10 - 02:11 PM

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2010-06-16a.975.1

Lord Colwyn (Conservative)

Will my noble friend the Minister report any progress on the Live Music Bill, which so nearly became law in the past Parliament and would have given licensing exemption to small venues, thus encouraging musical performance, especially for young musicians?

Lord Shutt of Greetland (Deputy Chief Whip, House of Lords; Liberal Democrat)

My Lords, my noble friend may well be right about that. I am afraid that I have no news about any timescale for such a Bill.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 01:57 PM

The following from Shefield Council's submission is interesting.

It is our view also that the music created by customers/members of the public is not a 'provision' by the premises owner and therefore not a licensable activity in itself and therefore not requiring the incidental exemption. It is the provision of the facilities themselves that are licensable not the music emanating from them. We therefore think that the question asked is based on a false premise.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 04:04 AM

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm100614/text/100614w0001.htm#1006146000002

Dr Huppert: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport if he will bring forward proposals to amend the Licensing Act 2003 to prevent last-minute licence reviews of events held once a year; and if he will make a statement. [1906]

John Penrose: The Department will be examining the Licensing Act 2003 and other regulatory regimes in order to consider the scope for streamlining and simplification.

We want to ensure a careful balance between supporting the businesses affected by the regulation and ensuring the public are protected. We will consider the options carefully before making any firm decisions.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 01:48 PM

http://www.culture.gov.uk/consultations/7155.aspx

DCMS has published the consultation on 'entertainment failities'.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 02:18 PM

http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?sectioncode=7&storycode=67256&c=1

Penrose, whose remit as minister for tourism and heritage covers licensing, explained that responsibility for pubs would be shared between the Home Office and his department.

"The partnership between us and the Home Office is because of the issues around licensing but I do not think you will find there is any agenda for the Home Office to penalise well-run pubs and clubs.

"I hope it would not be necessary (for the two departments) to go into battle. There is a real issue about anti-social behaviour and the Home Office is looking at that, but I don't think we have to clamp down on the rest of the industry."

The meeting also heard how plans to overhaul the Licensing Act were currently with the Home Secretary Theresa May.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 02:12 PM

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Cambridge/Be-fair-to-our-fair-pleads-Huppert.htm

He wants the Government to change the Licensing Act to prevent last-minute licence reviews – similar to the one that led to the event being cancelled this summer.

The Government has already agreed to review the Licensing Act and Mr Huppert wants his request included as part of that review.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 04:21 AM

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/bid-to-end-music-hall-joke-of-safety-laws-1999929.html

A former Cabinet Minister spoke today of his ambition to stop health and safety legislation being seen as a "music hall joke".

Lord Young, who has been asked by Prime Minister David Cameron to lead a Whitehall-wide review of health and safety laws, said that over the past 10 to 12 years a "nanny state" had "really" developed.

"There is no question, in any dangerous occupation, in any place where people are in danger, health and safety rules will apply," he told BBC Breakfast.

"But there are so many parts of life where it is an absolute nonsense. If there were still music halls, it would be a music hall joke."

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 05:10 PM

Are you feeding this to the Minister now responsible or do you know that someone else is?

Sites like this are a way of keeping people informed. What they do with this information is a matter for them. Hopefully they will inform and discuss it with others.

For the effect that may benefit us all, I would suggest that the best assumption to make is that none of this information has already being made available to anyone with the power to change matters.

There will be little harm if this information is referred to many times by many people to those with the power to change matters. In fact that is probably the only way that positive change will occur.

The real harm is if we don't. There is unlikely to be any benefit if we just disuss it amomgst ourselves here and everyone leaves it to everyone else to inform those with the power to change matters.

So please don't assume that those with the power to changes things will have already been informed so you don't have to - just do what you can to inform them yourself and post any sensible responses here.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: Howard Jones
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 10:18 AM

Presumably if the bands played during the match then it would be "ancillary music" and wouldn't need a licence.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: Old Vermin
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 10:06 AM

Typifies the worst of New Labour's mix of bureaucracy and old meddling Puritanism.

Are you feeding this to the Minister now responsible or do you know that someone else is?

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 06:27 AM

http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/World-Cup-music-event-cancelled.6353303.jp

World Cup music event cancelled

Published Date: 10 June 2010
A LIVE music event which was due to take place over the weekend has been cancelled.

Nine bands due to perform at The Hamilton Russell Arms, in Thorpe Thewles, near Wolviston, this weekend – as part of a World Cup beer festival – have been cancelled after a problem with the temporary entertainment licence.

Bosses have said all other aspects of the festival will go ahead as planned, with the England v USA game shown live on a big screen on Saturday.

People who have already bought tickets have the choice of £2 off on arrival or another pint of beer on top of the one they already get free with the ticket.

Can anyone explain the logic involved here? The music is prevented but the TV sport event (the showing of which does not require any form of Entertainment Licensing) can proceed!!!

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: Old Vermin
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 03:23 PM

The story about the shanty license problem seems to have stayed on the BBC News front page for some while. No other news is good news.

Time to write to my MP - the charming Jeremy Hunt - again, I guess.

Come to think of it someone from Liberty [NCCL as was] - was it Shami Chakrabarti herself - was very pleasant and interested at the anti PEL Bill demo on a very chilly day way back.

Oh, I was going to ask - what will the The Shambles - could he be the man who also posts to uk.music.folk - do with his extra spare time should the government sensibly reform or abolish the legislation?

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 08:37 AM

Fancy a glass of wine on the ward?
Thursday, June 10, 2010, 11:00Patients at a new private hospital near Bath could soon be enjoying a glass of wine with their meals.
CircleBath has applied to Bath and North East Somerset Council for an alcohol and regulated entertainment licence.

If it is granted, people being treated at the £30 million hospital in Peasedown St John will be able to have alcohol with their food if medics agree.

There will also be entertainment in the central atrium of the hospital for patients and visitors to enjoy.

http://www.southwestbusiness.co.uk/healthcareequipmentandservices/Fancy-glass-wine-ward/article-2285352-detail/article.html

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 09 Jun 10 - 02:12 PM

Falmouth's Sea Shanty Festival has not been granted an entertainment licence - because organisers missed the deadline.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cornwall/10274836.stm

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 09 Jun 10 - 01:12 PM

"So we'll exempt small venues with capacities of less than 200 and go back to the rule where any venue can put on a performance of un-amplified music by one or two people without a licence. "

A reintroduction of the two-in-a-bar would at least return the situation to what is was. However, this part of the Live Music Bill is the typical animal that tends to be created out of the committee process, it is a totally new and confused creation and it is important that it should not be referred to as the reintroduction of anything.

This version first seemed to surface as a compromise from the Select Committee but they and the Lib Dems when adopting it, missed the main aspect of 2-in-a-bar. This exempted all live music by 2 or less 'performers' & applied only where alcohol licensing was already in place. This at least sensibly recognised that no additional entertainment licensing was required in these premises to ensure the public's interest and safety. Which is a logical starting point.

The introduction of an exemption for non-amplified music will be of little real benefit to the majority of live music performance but such an exemption will end the situation where the small amount of non-amplified music that does stuggle on, is prevented or limited on the grounds of noise. It would be easy to extend to all non-amplified live muisc, the existing exemption for the non-amplified music for a performance of Morris Dancing.

For is the current situation logical, where the same instruments playing the same non-amplified tunes becomes licensable if there is no one dancing?

Of course an expansion of the 200 capacity exemption would be of most use but care must be taken to ensure that an attempt at an exemption to cover all non-amplified music is not dropped.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 09 Jun 10 - 01:06 PM

http://www.christianlegalcentre.com/view.php?id=982

By amending the notice in the Church's favour, the Court established an important principle—namely that any decision to serve a Noise Abatement Notice must be objectively verifiable by means of an independent Sound Level and not at the subjective whim of an Enforcement Officer.

It may be an important principle but it would seem that few if any LAs are taking any notice.............

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: nickp
Date: 09 Jun 10 - 04:22 AM

"So we'll exempt small venues with capacities of less than 200 and go back to the rule where any venue can put on a performance of un-amplified music by one or two people without a licence. "

Not sure I'd want to be unamplified with 200 people. Unless they were very very quiet!

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 01:18 PM

Over 2000 public comments on Government's plans for next five years. Add your views by 10 June

http://bit.ly/aUNtUT

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 11:23 AM

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2072261_caversham_school_bids_for_booze_licence

The live music relates to school music concerts and bands performing at weddings, while dancing provision relates to the school's summer ball held every other year.

But 23 letters of objection have been received from residents concerned it will cause "public nuisance" and an increase in traffic.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 04:06 AM

http://www.thestage.co.uk/features/feature.php/28030/cultivating-culture

Published Wednesday 28 April 2010 at 15:11 by Nick Clegg

We'll also end the bureaucratic nightmares that hold performers back, like Labour's live music licensing system, for example. It has become a complicated, time-consuming regime which has even caught schools, hospitals and colleges in its tentacles, and is stifling the kind of small-scale live music that is so important for the future.

So we'll exempt small venues with capacities of less than 200 and go back to the rule where any venue can put on a performance of un-amplified music by one or two people without a licence. That is how we can foster new talent and new community venues. And Liberal Democrats recognise how extraordinarily competitive careers in performance and the arts can be, and how many of the people working in them are struggling.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 03:59 AM

http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?sectioncode=7&storycode=66789

8 April, 2010

Shadow Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt said: "We support the campaign to extend the exemption from requiring a licence for live music performances to 200 people.

"The Licensing Act was meant to support the live music industry, but has turned out to be a disaster.


"Extending the exemption to 200 people will reduce the burden of bureaucracy on pubs, and provide a much needed boost to the live music industry."

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 06 Jun 10 - 01:57 PM

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2010-06-03a.396.1&s=rural

I have a few words to say about music. I hope that the coalition will be able to make a clear statement on the situation over the Live Music Bill, which was widely supported but failed to survive the last few days of the previous Administration. A widely criticised recent DCMS live music report claimed that overall live music is "thriving", but acknowledged that this was not the case for smaller venues. However, the "thriving" conclusion was not based on any direct measure of performances, but relied instead on indirect evidence-an 11 per cent increase in live music licence applications, an apparent 20 per cent increase in the number of professional musicians, and a modest increase in self-reported gig attendance and Arts Council participation data. The last time that the DCMS surveyed actual performances in venues like bars and restaurants was in 2007. This showed a 5 per cent fall in performances after the Licensing Act came into effect in April 2005, measured against benchmark the 2004 pre-Act MORI survey which found that the majority of premises had no music at all in the previous 12 months. This did not stop DCMS from calling it a flourishing live music scene.

The Live Music Bill, which would give licensing exemption to gigs for fewer than 200 people, reintroduce the "two in a bar" rule that allows one or two musicians to play with either minimal or no amplification and exempt hospitals, schools and colleges from requiring licences for events where alcohol is not being sold should be reintroduced to Parliament as soon as possible. I believe that the Home Secretary, Theresa May, will be reviewing the 2003 Licensing Act and I urge her to consider separating entertainment licensing with an exemption for small gigs from alcohol licensing.

Grouping those two licensable activities together may have seemed a neat administrative solution, but it has seriously harmed live music in different ways, first by significantly reducing the number of places where musicians can work and radically increasing bureaucracy and, secondly, by creating the wholly misleading impression that live music is first and foremost a danger to society-as dangerous as alcohol. That is not only offensive to those who care for live music; it suggests that, as a nation, we have surrendered to petty officialdom.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 04 Jun 10 - 01:31 PM

http://www.popall.co.uk/training/leadinglawyerscallforamorebalancedapproachtonoisefrompubs.asp

"There have been two recent decisions on the topical issue of nuisance affecting licensed premises, but I think the subject remains a mystery to some. The first point is that 'nuisance' is a technical term and does not simply mean that residents can hear either music or noise from a pub or pub garden (as some residents think); the test is, thankfully, less straightforward.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 04 Jun 10 - 12:22 PM

The following from Phil Little.

While researching case histories of pubs with licensing problems, one thing is becoming clear. That is, the recent trend is for Council licensing officers is to issue 'Pre-emptive Noise Abatement Orders'.

That means live music can be stopped or an event can be cancelled for ...causing too much noise before it has actually happened, because a licensing officer thinks it might cause a noise problem.

Worse still these officers are not using sound measuring equipment to measure excessive deci-bells. They are relying on their ears.

It is essential this new co-alition take steps to curb the tyranny
maintained by local authority licensing departments.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 04 Jun 10 - 06:07 AM

There seemed to be a problem with that link.

Battle over 'boozing in the wood' plan by late-night cafe
[e-mail]

02 June 2010

A BID to sell booze to partygoers until 1am in a tranquil wood has been met with outrage by residents and conservation groups.

The owner of Queens Wood Café in Queen's Wood, Muswell Hill, which backs on to dozens of homes in six roads, wants to increase takings by opening up the tiny former wood-keeper's cottage for hire.

But residents have bombarded the council with 200 PAGES of objections - some calling for the application to be thrown out altogether amid fears of an increase in crime and disorder.

One neighbour called the bid "frankly tantamount to an application to become a public nuisance", while others suggested banning "private parties" altogether at the venue, which sits in a nature reserve.

Café owner Harry Shelmerdine has already scaled back the hours for selling alcohol to midnight on Friday, Saturday and Sunday nights and 11pm on other nights, after police objected.

But he has not gone far enough for some. In a letter to the council's licensing team, The Highgate Society said "private parties, where a primary object is the consumption of alcohol and loud music, should be specifically excluded" from the licence.

A Muswell Hill Road resident echoed many others' fears of "potentially large numbers of people congregating late at night with alcohol (and inevitably drugs) in close proximity to our homes".

An objector whose Connaught Gardens home backs on to the woods blasted the "ridiculous" bid, adding: "This is completely at odds with everything the lodge has stood for and everything that is the very nature of the woods."

Another neighbour said: "If we had wished to live where 'the action' is we would have chosen to live among the shops and restaurants".

Others claim the entire application is void - even illegal - as notices at the café were not prominent enough.

Concerns were also raised about a threat to wildlife, the health and safety of revellers stumbling around the unlit woods, and parking pressures.

The small cafe is currently only used after 6pm for "art exhibition openings, book launches and meetings of local associations", said Mr Shelmerdine in his application.

It has a capacity of 56 altogether, but only 30 inside.

The council's noise team has asked the licensing panel, which meets on Monday evening, to impose a raft of restrictions to clamp down on disturbance, including sound limiters and keeping all doors and windows closed.

Its report added the noise from partygoers leaving at the end of the night "is likely to be detrimental" to neighbours and could be "exacerbated by the level of public transport available" there late at night.

Muswell Hill ward councillor Jonathan Bloch also called for a "no discos or DJs" rule, no amplified live music and for the licence to end with the building lease.

In an open letter to objectors, Mr Shelmerdine agreed to many curbs and said "no-one has ever complained to the police or the council about any of our parties" held when the café was last licensed, between 1999 and 2005.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 04 Jun 10 - 06:01 AM

It would seem that any old complaint from anybody about noise is assumed in the first instance to be a valid one. The validity of the complaint must be investigated first.

My experience of making a formal representation to support a licensing application for my local pub was that it was ruled not to be valid.

The danger seems to be that once any form of noise complaint is made, all council departments seem to become involved in insuring that some form of resulting sanction is applied and such sanctions will affect non-amplified music, which is not presenting any noise concern, as no distinction is made.

http://www.muswellhilljournal24.co.uk/content/haringey/muswellhilljournal/news/story.aspx?brand=MHJOnline&category=news&tBrand=n

Muswell Hill ward councillor Jonathan Bloch also called for a "no discos or DJs" rule, no amplified live music and for the licence to end with the building lease.

In an open letter to objectors, Mr Shelmerdine agreed to many curbs and said "no-one has ever complained to the police or the council about any of our parties" held when the café was last licensed, between 1999 and 2005.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: Dennis the Elder
Date: 03 Jun 10 - 07:25 PM

I am beginning to believe that local authorities have becomea little gung ho!
It is important to investigate the complaint, prior to the service of notice, not after.
The action of Denbighshire County Council sounds a litle pathetic, as if the officers do not know what they are doing, very sad!

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 03 Jun 10 - 05:59 PM

http://rhyljournal.co.uk/news/89108/pubgoers-protest-over-noise-notice.aspx

A spokesperson from Denbighshire County Council confirmed that a complaint had been received and a noise abatement notice issued while investigations go on.

Just one complaint..................

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 01 Jun 10 - 07:47 PM

http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news.ma/article/87230?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ma-rss-all-n

Licensing Act: is it a review or a revamp?

    * By Peter Coulson
    * 01/06/2010 11:19

Last week, the new Government announced that it was embarking on a review of the Licensing Act, but not a change of department, as had been predicted.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 29 May 10 - 12:14 PM

Did the Local government Ombudsman help in your situation?

No it did not help and made a sensible solution even more unlikely. But is there really any choice for the public when the advice presented and decisions made by local authority employees are not sensible?

Without being too judgemental here about local authority employees (for I am one also) - we do have to be realistic. In any internal complaint process, it is probably not very realistic to expect those complained about to find themselves to be wrong. This process must have first taken place before a complaint to the LGO is possible.

You have to look at the nature of complaints and the quite different responses dependent on this and which raise many further questions.

For example, (a) one to the local authority from the public about noise and (b) one about the local authority from the public.

In (a) the whole system could certainly be seen as not only built to satisfy complainants but possibly as bound to encourage such complaints and to involve much available pieces of legislation in the process.

In (b) the whole system could certainly be seen as not only built to support the original decision but possibly as bound to discourage such complaints and to involve much available pieces of legislation in the process.

In (a) the complaint is most likely to be thought valid but in (b) the complaint is thought more likely not to be valid.

The statistic were that in 95% of the complaints, the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) found the complainants to be wrong. And in the remaining 5%, the complainants were not happy with the results of a supposed successful result in their favour.

The LGO is not an effective watchdog and without one - how can there be any expectation of help from this quarter or of there being any sensible actions resulting from local authority employees? For they know that any member of the public who is forced to complain about their actions, will only find the LGO too willing to findings against the complainant.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: Dennis the Elder
Date: 29 May 10 - 05:01 AM

Did the Local government Ombudsman help in your situation?
Obviously, if so this could be the landlady's next step.
With reference to your previous post regarding objecting to planning, this too can be problematic.
I remember once objecting as an officer to the building Houses around the site of a large dog kennels. This objection was successful and plans were refused. Unfortunately on appeal planning permission was subsequently granted with central government intervention. Subsequently due to the numerous dog barking complaints from the occupiers of the new dwellings the council had to pay to relocate the dog kennels. Just illustrating that even when there is a sensible approach by officers and by council members common sense is still overturned.
Life is not quite as simple with regards to officers alleged noise nuisance as it first appears. You are obviously aware of this.
In some instances it appears to be a loose loose situation, when none of the parties involved is satisfied with the officer's action.
I must, however state that at present in the authority where I am working we have over a 90% rate for amicable solutions, but is this even good enough?.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 27 May 10 - 03:21 PM

If this is true then she should complain to the Chief Environmental Officer or equivalent or to her Local Authority Councillor or preferably the leader of her council.

Having taken all those steps myself to no effect (other than to unite all these parties even more firmly against the complainant) and with the complaint then going to the Local Government Ombudsman, I consider this suggested course of action to be a complete waste of time and effort.

Sensible local officers may exist but in areas where they do not - it is difficult to see any way that a sensible course can be obtained.