Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: Saucy Sal
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 08:33 AM

Shame to see my comment taken out of context "seem to be a bit overzealous" - I've only read one side of the debate, there surely must be another and I'd like to hear it. Can anyone help? Is there a thread or site or something?

By the way RobRik we came from Lancashire - not just for the festival, that was a very nice incidental, but on our way to Cornwall.
This year we're planning to do the same. Who's in the final lineup?

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 09:11 AM

This link to the Weymouth and Portland Borough Council website was in the first post of this thread and gives all the details.

http://www.weymouth.gov.uk/main.asp?svid=7&svaid=187&svapid=1581

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: BobRik
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 12:57 PM

SausySal- I have contacted you "offlist" with details. Look forward to meeting you at the Fetsival.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: BobRik
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 01:02 PM

Sausy Sal, if you want "the other side of the debate" I have all the necessary information. Makes interesting reading.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 02:28 PM

Bob perhaps you would care to share this interesting reading with us? I am sure we would all be interested to read it........

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: vindelis
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 07:22 PM

Perhaps people need to be reminded that the operative word is FUNDED, 90% of the ORGANIZATION has been carried out by 'lay-people' ie local singers, dancers and musicians who simply want to enjoy a successful festival - As I have said before, last year was one hell of a learning curve for those not used to organizing folk festivals, but they achieved a remarkable weekend and I can only hope that this year's event willl be as good if not better.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 01:55 AM

All the partipants of the two local sessions and all the others across the country wanted was to enjoy making folk music in a perfectly safe pub. This council and others did/do not see the risk to this activity to be important or to impact on them in any practical sense. They may now?

The threat or risk to the success of this 2nd festival is by the fact that the council have organised it. Is it not true that all of the main acts are to appear in the council owned Pavilion theatre?

It is this association with a dubious partner that theatens the efforts of local supporters. Until they address this policy with this partner, it remains a fact that attempts for outside support, will be affected by this.

If you were involved in organising a children's event, you may recognise that partents may not be too keen to allow their children to attend, if the main organiser, on whose premises the event was to take place, was a known child-abuser..............

That is the reality of the problem that faces those whose do not wish to address the council's damaging and uncaring policy towards folk music but continue to urge people to support this festival in this form.

If support and pressure can be added and applied locally to get the policy changed NOW, the problem/risk/threat to this festival is lifted. This proposal has been placed before the Council. If the local supporters all took this theat to the festival to their councillors, many of whom are due for election in May it would certainly help us all.

As so many outside people have written and already done this, it is surely not expecting too much for the local folk to do so as well?

Or is it?

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: Saucy Sal
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 08:38 AM

Shambles - I don't know who you are, but I find your analogy ("If you were involved in organising a children's event, you may recognise that partents may not be too keen to allow their children to attend, if the main organiser, on whose premises the event was to take place, was a known child-abuser..............")to be beyond the pale! I just don't believe anyone could use such an anlogy so lightly just to score political points?

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: BobRik
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 08:44 AM

I wonder if the man who was responsible for informing the Council of this "safe activity" would be brave enough to own up to it. I guess that would be too much to expect.
And SaucySal, yes it is a shame that political points are made in such a crude manner.
When did Folk Music get this heavy!!!

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 12:27 PM

Bob if you have something to say perhaps you would just come out and say it? Then perhaps someone could have the chance to answer it?

It would be wise to make sure first what you believe and find convienient to be true, is in fact true.

Before you rumble on with your 'heavy' implications and and still attempt to cling to the moral high ground.

Which is the 'safe activity, to which you refer?

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: vindelis
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 12:59 PM

You may go to the festival hoping to have a wonderful time, you may go and protest peacefully, you may stand on the side-lines and bicker; yes the new law is an ass, a big one, but just remember the following song, because sommetimes the real message is lost in the din.


Without the song, there's no show.



I saw no storm clouds appear
Is that the sound of thunder I hear?
Or the sound of warm applause?
No, it's just the roars
Of clashing egos and crashing bores



You know you're the best
So why not listen to the rest?
Don't sharpen your claws
Don't join the roars
Of clashing egos and crashing bores



Small fishes, small ponds
They wait for you to go on
They even call out for more
Then join the roars
Of clashing egos and crashing bores



The singers come and go
But without the song, there's no show
How can you sell, what's not yours?
Don't join the roars
Of clashing egos and crashing bores



The bottle may be shattered
But it's the message that matters
So if it washes on your shore
Don't join the roars
Of clashing egos and crashing bores



Roger Gall 1997

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 02:41 PM

That was a jolly good song. *Smiles*

'Folk music got this heavy' for me in 2000, when the licensee of the pub who had agreed to us playing folk music there, received a letter from this very same Weymouth and Portland Borough Council. This threatened them with prosecution and a possible £20,000 fine or six months in prison if they allowed it to continue without them paying them for an additional licence, as their considered the activity automatically made it unsafe.

This after the Licensing Manager visited undercover and left unannounced, had declared this to be a public entertainment and that the participants were more than the permitted number of 'performers'.

Back for a moment to our, and the council's present problems.

Dorset Evening Echo Wednesday 12 February 2003

FAMILIES in Weymouth and Portland are facing a big rise in their council tax bills.

Councillors decided on a 50 per cent increase in the borough's share of council charges despite agreeing to a package of savings worth almost £450,000.

Borough council chiefs have been forced to make radical cuts and introducing a steeper council tax charge to plug a budget shortfall of £1.9 million.

Among the controversial measures announced yesterday were the closure of 11 public toilets around the borough, scrapping the meteorological service, reducing road sweeping, reinstating the increase in harbour pontoon charges and introducing disabled parking charges.

Although few jobs are affected, Weymouth and Portland Unison secretary Chris Moscrop warned of a possible impact on existing staff because some posts have been `frozen.'

After a marathon five-hour debate the management committee came up with savings of £448,700 and consequently recommended a council tax increase of just over 53 per cent to the full council which meets next Thursday (February 20). If agreed, it will mean the cost for a band B property will rise over £50 to £155.30 a year (or £2.98 a week), and the cost for a band D property will increase by just under £70 to £199.67 a year (or £3.84 per week).

These figures represent only the borough council's share of the whole council tax and does not include Dorset County Council and Dorset Police precepts, which make up the lion's share of the total bill. The county is due to fix its figure tomorrow. Finance chiefs expect the overall total bill to increase by about 20 per cent.

Council chief executive Tom Grainger said today: "I'm pleased the committee agreed that it was important to set a balanced budget with no use of reserves to support ongoing spending.

"In order to keep the tax rise to the least possible level even before yesterday's committee the council had made savings of over £1 million."

Management committee chairman, Coun Anne Thomas, said moves had to be made to put the authority on a sound financial footing.

She said after the meeting: "We have faced some very difficult decisions but it is cross-party proposals which will form the committee's budget.

"It's a hung authority so it's important to get everyone to work together to come up with an agreement."

Borough finance spokesman, Coun Kay Wilcox, said: "I'm pleased that the policy and scrutiny committees will be meeting before the full council so that recommendations from here can be looked at in detail and that officers and brief holders can answer questions.

"I hope this approach will be constructive and lead to a consensus."

West Dorset District Council's council tax precept is to increase by 17 per cent.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 06:10 PM

A bit more detail.

Other savings include introducing off-street parking charges for all disabled badge holders except for those in receipt of benefit/welfare and those who get a mobility allowance, reinstating an increase in harbour pontoon charges, making savings on festivals and events, cutting back on suburban street sweeping except in the town centre and on primary routes plus stopping the meteorological service and investigating how it could be done in-house.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Feb 03 - 01:40 PM

14 February 2003
Paul Andrews
[e-mail] [For their campaign against the Bill]
http://www.thisisdevon.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=116762&command=newPage

Music lovers are threatening to boycott a West country festival in a row over entertainment licenses.

Enthusiasts are set to stay away from this year's Weymouth Folk Festival in Dorset because they are angry at proposals set out in the Government's Licensing Bill. Local campaigners helped to organise a national petition protesting about the Bill and more than 10,000 people signed within a week.

And they have also bombarded Weymouth and Portland Borough Council with complaints that folk performers are being unfairly treated, and hit out at new proposals which they fear could mean making music in pubs a crime.

Many now say they intend to boycott the folk festival, due to be staged between May 9 and 11.

Roger Gall, from Portland, who started the petition, said: "The situation is crazy. People don't want these activities banned, they are an important part of their lives. I would have liked to have seen the folk festival go well, of course, but many people's attitude is that the council only seem interested in folk music for two days because their attitude towards licensing is unsupportive for the rest of the year."

In a series of letters to the borough council folk music enthusiasts have said they will stay away from this years' event.

Mary Humpheys, from Ely in Cambridgeshire, said: I would not consider coming to the festival. I am certain that many of my performing colleagues would also be of the same mind. By not supporting these traditions and showing your support to ridiculous Draconian measures you are abusing your position and only using folk music to make money.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Feb 03 - 04:50 PM

The latest news is that my councillor reports that the Council's legal dept have examined the QC's opinion and have declared that it does not change anything!

This was the opinion commissioned by the MU that was good enough and largely responsible for the Joint Committee on Human Rights declaring the very same blanket licensing proposed by the Bill presented a significant risk of an incompatibility with people's right to freedom of expression under ECHR Article 10.

Not good enough for my council to change their current policy though. Another of my councillors said: "Well it is only one QC's opinion".

Rather missing the point that it was one more that the council had.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: clansfolk
Date: 16 Feb 03 - 10:21 AM

scan of newspaper article "extract" above are taken from:-

Weymouth folk festival

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Feb 03 - 10:21 AM

I quote from above:

"Enthusiasts are set to stay away from this year's Weymouth Folk Festival in Dorset because they are angry at proposals set out in the Government's Licensing Bill"

This is simply not true, and wholly misleading.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: clansfolk
Date: 16 Feb 03 - 10:42 AM

Guest.............   follow my link above and read the article (sorry about small print) -

I will not be going this year neither will many of the people in the clubs that I have spoken with in this area of Lancashire in direct response to Weymouth CC over reaction and enforcement the current "Two in a Bar" rule -

Maybe the quote above should not imply that the withdrawal of support for the Weymouth Festival by enthusiast is because they are angry at the new proposals but more that they are angry at the current "over" enforcement of current act by Weymouth, and their concerns on how Weymouth will use the new/proposed license to "keep down" unlicensed song, dance and music unless making money for them - Folk Music the music of the Folk....... not for sale or rent.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: The Shambles
Date: 16 Feb 03 - 12:13 PM

I had thought that the original aticle was on this thread? The Western Morning Press appear to have slightly 'tinkered' with the wording to fit the story into their campaign against the Bill. I must admit that am more pleased that they ran the story, rather than upset at the small change they made.

I think this is slightly more preferable than local authority officers, misleading the public, misleading their members, tinkering with the law and using it against beneficial folk music activities.

But I may well be biased?

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Feb 03 - 07:53 PM

I sent this to the Dorset Evening Echo today. I wonder if it will be published? If you wish to [e-mail]

Open letter to the voters of Weymouth and Portland.
Many of the current Weymouth and Portland Borough Councillors will be up for re-election in May

Many of the councillors will be unaware that their council has funded and organised the 2nd Weymouth Folk Festival, the main events of this take place in the council owned Pavilion Theatre, and this is also due to take place in May.

Many will be unaware of their local policy, which threatens the success of this Weymouth folk festival.

Many will be unaware that many potential outside visitors to this festival have written to the council, and The Dorset Evening Echo, stating that they will not be visiting the borough or attending the event, until the council changes its current policy.

Many will be unaware that the policy they support and which they maintain to be the best policy for this borough is the following: -
That any pub customer making any form of unpaid music for his or her own pleasure will be considered as a 'performer' in a public entertainment. And if there are more than two customers, making music, this will be considered to have made these premises automatically unsafe without the premises paying a fee to the council for an additional Public Entertainment Licence. Licensees can face a £20,000 fine or six months in prison and have been threatened with this, should this activity proceed without the additional licence.

Many will be unaware that there is no case law support for this policy, when it is used against unpaid customers making music for their own enjoyment.

Many will be unaware that the council have recently been presented with a QC's opinion via Jim Knight MP, that places very serious doubts that this council's policy is compatible with Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.   

Many councillors will be unaware that under Section 6 of the Human Rights Act, is it unlawful for a council to act in way that is incompatible with a European Convention right.

Perhaps the electors would like to ask their own councillor if they are aware of the above and intend to support this policy, when a proposal to change it, is shortly to be placed before them? And if they still intend to support it, why they consider it to be the best policy for this borough?

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Feb 03 - 08:23 PM

The above has not (yet) appeared in the paper, nor has the following.

From Jane Allison & Trevor Gilson
Organisers, Fo'c'sle Folk Club, Southampton

Dear Editor
The following letter was sent to you previously on 13 Feb, but, so far as we are aware, not printed (obviously we cannot see every edition over here, nor do we have time to scrutinise the web every day, and have to rely on friends to tell us). It occurs that you may have rejected it for lack of a proper postal address (now rectified). In any event, we can now comment on a reply we have received from WPBC (both the reply and the comment follow the original letter below in that order).

Dear Mr Grainger
(an open letter to the Chief Executive of WPBC)

How it is reasonably done elsewhere

It happened that a pub with a recently-acquired PEL but long-established live music presence (not in our Local Authority area) found that a second pub nearby, without PEL, had started hosting similar weekly 'open stage' musical events on the same evening (not the fault of the second pub's landlord).

The licensees knew each other, so they had a friendly chat and decided that they could live with it, if the Licensing Office did not object (the premises with PEL now has more than two paid performers on other evenings, making their licence obligatory). An Environmental Health Officer visited the unlicensed landlord and had a chat with him, so they could work out a way to allow the music to continue. It was agreed there would be no external publicity and the landlord was required to inform the music organiser of this decision in writing. Locally, this was regarded as a fairly harsh, but acceptable, measure tailored to the particular circumstances.

We are not defending the current silly, out-of-date legislation behind this decision, but we hardly need to point up the difference in attitude between this Local Authority, which genuinely supports independent music organisers and fosters a spirit of friendly co-operation between small venues and the Environmental Health Department (in accordance with the Government's avowed hopes), and the stance of your Council Officials which has resulted in the destruction of some long-established live music meetings within your remit.

Our Folk Club (together with many other Members of the Southern Counties Folk Federation) know there is a second Weymouth Folk Festival in May (partly funded by the Weymouth Borough Council) and will support the local (unpaid) Folk Organisers in any way possible.

People in the folk music world try very hard to support each other and we would suggest that some Council Officials actually physically go to a Concert, dance at a Ceilidh, watch the display Dance Teams, or sit in on a Singaround or Instrument Session and gain some idea of what folk music is all about. You might even enjoy yourselves and maybe your interpretation of the "letter of the law" (rather than the spirit of the law) might be a little less destructive to local music-making.

WPBC replied as follows via ..[The Licensing Manager]

Many thanks for your views on PELs which have been passed to me for comment. You appear, sadly like many others over the last year or so, to have been misinformed by the propaganda machine here (which it would seem is largely fuelled by one individual).

This Council and its Officers do not spend their time actively seeking out folk gatherings in order to 'punish' them in some way. In fact, we only have 2 staff dealing with the issue and enforcement of 15 types of licence so we have to prioritise enforcement accordingly.

The truth of the matter is that if an informal gathering of musicians happened as an irregular event without advertisement (and no complaints were received about it) then this Council would not pro-actively enforce. However, if complaints are received then we are duty bound to investigate and, if necessary, encourage the licensee to apply for a PEL.

Here is our response:

Dear …{Licensing Manager]
Although your response does not address any of the points we made (did you actually read our letter, or was your reply a stock response to complaints?) there are several things in it which cannot be allowed to pass without comment.

1) As Club and Festival Organisers ourselves, we are in touch with the local, national and international folk world in a way which you (not being part of it) probably find hard to appreciate.

We are also one of the unpaid twin hubs of the communications/information network the Southern Counties Folk Federation (we run the Website and E-mail News Service which will be advertising the Weymouth Festival - free - and our colleague runs the Federation Magazine, Folk On Tap, which will take an advert).

As such, we are hardly likely to have had our views 'fuelled by one individual' as you say, and our real knowledge of events is probably greater than your own on several fronts. We acknowledge that you are not the only Council to have taken this stand, but the point our letter made was that not all Councils adopt your extreme stance, which is also at variance with the Government's stated hopes.

We refer to your statement " ...if complaints are received then we are duty bound to investigate and, if necessary, encourage the licensee to apply for a PEL..."

1) Whilst it is true that you acquired information, to say that 'complaints' were received stretches the meaning of the word. Whilst you presumably have privileged access to Council records which
cannot be made public due to confidentiality, we choose to accept the words of the several affected parties and we don't believe you could substantiate your claim in law.

2) " ...we are duty bound to investigate and, if necessary, encourage the licensee to apply for a PEL." The reason you are so bound ('duty' stretches it a bit) is that sometime ago someone in the Council's employment decided that he/she was going to classify recreational musicians as performers. You cannot change your collective mind on this, because you might be subject to claims for compensation dating way back (to say nothing of loss of face).

There is no legal requirement for this interpretation; the law is thoroughly ambiguous and you do have leeway to interpret it less severely than you have done. Had the new Bill not been in the Queens Speech, the Musicians Union was ready to fight a test case somewhere suitable and its eye had fallen on Weymouth's destructive practices.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: Folkiedave
Date: 26 Feb 03 - 12:21 PM

I have missed a real opportunity here and I am kicking myself metaphorically from Weymouth to Holmfirth - where the local authority (up to now has taken a sensible attitutde to these things).

So anyone wanting a weekend with some top name artists, excellent facilities and some very friendly boozers (buildings and people), get a season ticket and come along to Holmfirth!!

Dave Eyre
www.holmfirth.festival.com
www.collectorsfolk.co.uk

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: The Shambles
Date: 28 Feb 03 - 09:13 PM

The following from the SCoFF website

Weymouth's 2nd Folk Festival by the sea 9-11 May 2003 featuring Oyster Band, Martin Simpson, The Yetties, Last Night's Fun plus Workshops, Concerts, Late Night Sessions, Morris and Appalachian Dancing, Ceilidh, Folk Village, Busking, Pub Sessions.

Contact Karen Brown on 01305 812876. Acommodation etc see WPBC website and the Pavilion Theatre Box Office is 01305 783225 (This is NOT a WPBC Festival, it is organised by local folkies who have accepted some Council funding and the use of a Council-run facility, the Pavilion Theatre).

I can only refer you to the council's standard PR on the festival (posted earlier in this thread), and ask you to make up your own mind on the accuracy or otherwise of the above statement.

Trevor and Jane were wondering in their post above, if the reply they received from the council was a standard response. Has anyone else received the same reply?

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: vindelis
Date: 01 Mar 03 - 02:19 PM

Opening remarks of last year's folk festival 'brochure':

WEYMOUTH FOLK FESTIVAL
Welcome to Weymouth and Portland's first Folk Festival
"It is with great pleasure that I write these few words of welcome to this first Weymouth Folk Festival. It is a new event for our Borough and I would like to thank all who have worked to get the festival off the ground and in particular The Weymouth Folk Club, local folk enthusiasts and artists.
This an exciting step forward for folk music and live entertainment, I wish all concerned every success.
Live entertainment is an essential part of our way of life, 'FOLK' is the bedrock of that tradition and way of live.
In what ever capacity you are attending this folk festival have a great time.
I for one look forward to the Weymouth Folk Festival becoming part of the established scene here in Weymouth and Portland and hope this is just the first of many."
Coucillor Brian Ellis, Chair Economic, Tourism and Promotion Committee Weymouth and Portland Borough Council
Organised by the Tourism and Corporate Services Dept of Weymouth and Portland Borough Council, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE WEYMOUTH FOLK CLUB.' NOTE: The ORIGINAL idea was that of the Council. The man in whose lap the 'idea' fell, knew that he would need outside assistance. Members of Weymouth Folk Club, who had had previous experience of running Folk Festivals were then asked if they would help. This is the present team/committee,cal it what you will.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: GUEST,The Wider Vision?
Date: 02 Mar 03 - 05:37 AM

I have read with interest, and a little sadness at the above for some weeks now, and without wishing to also get involved in the wranglings, I would like to add one and one only addition.

I am neither a musician or a singer, but a lover of folk music and one of those dying breed that you all need...a member of your audience,it seems to me that the issues here are now far removed from the original and maybe good intentioned ones of opposing the new licensing rules but sadly have become all too personal and a matter of winning ones own point against the other.

I am not a member of government, therefore I do not yet know how this new legislation is going to be finally resolved, if at all even they do at this stage. I believe the efforts of lobbying M.P's and the weight of feeling in the form of petitions and media debates will hopefully have an effect on the ruling.

The sadness I have on reading the above see sawing of comments both political and personal, is that the very thing I believe needs nurturing and supporting,is being threatened. Folk clubs are few and far between, people lead busy lives and those good people who believe in the music enough to give up their time and efforts so that people like me can take great pleasure in listening to it should be encouraged not boycotted.

Folk clubs alone cannot afford to give us the pleasure of excellent festivals like last years one in Weymouth, without the support of local councils, and I for one are pleased Weymouth Pavillion believes enough in their local folk clubs and performers to still support them and give a venue for it despite their present financial problems.

If you have got this far in reading through this weighty mail, then I would ask you to aim your efforts WISELY, where it may have a real bearing, and to lobby central government to resolve this legislation favourably to local folk musicians.

Please dont kill for the future,the good relationship being built up between local people and the council, which will hopefully will give us all folk festivals for many years after this legislation has long been forgotten.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Mar 03 - 07:22 AM

I will repeat.

The festival is not really the issue.

The issue is this council's policy.

It would be nice if those who are so concerned about the success of the festival in its current form and post here to encourage others to attend, would at least address the policy.

It seems to have escaped attention of our above guest that this thread is not about the new legislation but about this particular council's past and current strict and damaging interpretation of existing legislation.

A 'buck-passing' lobby of central Government is also one advocated by this very council for two years but one that has not ans will not having bearing on this current legislation.

A forced change of this local policy however, even at this late stage, may well also highlight and affect the thinking behind the new legislation.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From:
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 05:21 PM

I for one support ANY live music, and take a dim view of others who do not.

I also do not like those who are dishonest in their political pursuits.

And I do not speak without knowledge and evidence.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 06:59 AM

The Licensing Manager's reply.

WPBC replied as follows via Sue Moore: [was Sue Allen]
Many thanks for your views on PELs which have been passed to me for comment. You appear, sadly like many others over the last year or so, to have been misinformed by the propaganda machine here (which it would seem is largely fuelled by one individual).

Perhaps an example of the 'misinformation' referred to, can be supplied, as most of this so – called misinformation, is in the form of the officer's own words. Also who this 'propaganda machine might be and why this was mentioned, as no reference to any individual was made in the original communication to the Licensing Manager?

The [then] Director of Tourism and Corporate Services, in a letter to Ian Bruce [then] MP, 19/03/01. "Where the provisions apply it is a requirement to have a licence and not something on which we have any discretion. And: "In terms of the reasoning behind the original legislation I am not sure I can see any difference between say two performers paid for or organised by the public house licensee and say three of four people playing and singing at the invitation or with the consent of the public house licensee."   

And again to Mr Bruce, 17/04/01. "Mr Gall simply does not accept the position that legally if there are more than two people taking part that a folk session at a pub does require an entertainment licence."

One of the Council's Solicitors, in a letter to Councillor Moss 21/01/02. "I had not read the case of Brearley –v- Moreley at the time of writing my letters to Councillor Booth (8th February 2001) or to Mr Birchall (22nd February 2201)."

It would be nice if the Council's officers be asked to now stop their continuing and increasingly ridiculous attempts to personalise this issue and respond correctly to outside suggestions? I feel this current tactic is largely made in order to ignore the important concerns at stake here, the weakness of the officer's position and their advice to members. For it has sadly been evidenced many times over the part two years, where the misinformation and propaganda, are in fact coming from, as sadly can again be seen from this reply.

This Council and its Officers do not spend their time actively seeking out folk gatherings in order to 'punish' them in some way. In fact, we only have 2 staff dealing with the issue and enforcement of 15 types of licence so we have to prioritise enforcement accordingly.

Sadly there are none (without PELs) left to seek out.

The Licensing Manager, in a letter to Roger Gall 02/03/01. "No complaint was received regarding your session [at the Cove House Inn]." The Public Enforcement Officer visited the premises as a result of the advertisement you placed in the Dorset Evening Echo."

And again 22/03/01. "It is our practice to regularly check publications such as the Dorset Evening Echo for any advertisement pertaining to licensing issues."

It would be more useful if a reply could be made to the concerns or to what actions the council officers may be responsible for, rather than an attempted defence of what they are not. However, a flower accidentally trampled, remains just as dead as one that is deliberately cut. The intentions of the officers are less important than the actions they are responsible for.

Despite the excuses given, these two staff, in only a two-month period, still managed four visits [only three as far as the members are aware], to the Cove House Inn. One of these was an under-cover visit by the writer of this reply, the Licensing Manager, who later wrote [above] to confirm that no complaint was received about the folk gathering there.

This did not prevent this staff of two from threatening the licensee with a £20,000 fine or a six month prison sentence, if this folk gathering continued without the licensee obtaining a Public Entertainment Licence.

The truth of the matter is that if an informal gathering of musicians happened as an irregular event without advertisement (and no complaints were received about it) then this Council would not pro- actively enforce.

Why address an irregular event when the issue is one of regular activities? The truth is that if a regular informal gathering of musicians (advertised or not), came to the officer's attention, a letter would be issued, and this action alone is enough to risk the event.
Perhaps the licensing manager could be asked to confirm the following?

1. Is it true for example, that in the case of the New Star Inn, that no advert was ever placed?
2. That no complaint was ever received?
3. And that no visit was ever made to establish if the activity was licensable or indeed if it was specifically exempt, in the whole five years of its duration?

However, if complaints are received then we are duty bound to investigate and, if necessary, encourage the licensee to apply for a PEL.

Perhaps the Council could be asked to confirm and inform the public that neither of the two Portland sessions, placed at risk by their actions did in fact, receive any complaints?

And that one was only enabled after the licensee, 'encouraged' by the above threats, was prepared to obtain a PEL, and the other, on receipt of the Council's letter, was prevented because the licensee was not? The Chief Executive in a note to my MP, not even being prepared to take any responsibility for the loss of the New Star session by claiming the officers actions to be a 'minimal light touch'.

It would be a pleasant and welcome surprise indeed, if the officers were ever to admit that they could have made more effort to care, and to better understand the nature of these sessions, and the risks presented to them.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Mar 03 - 07:00 AM

The QC's opinion has been examined by the legal dept, who comment as follows:

"The Council's Solicitors have advised the Chair that they would not wish to change their previous advice as far as the existing law is concerned." This is that advice, contained in the report to the Social and Community Committee meeting 05/06/01.

Human Rights Considerations
5.1 Mr Gall has argued that by requiring the premises at which sessions take place to obtain a PEL Council officers are interfering unlawfully with his right to freedom of expression contained in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. As has been explained to Mr Gall, the right to freedom of expression is not an absolute right under the Convention.

By applying the relevant licensing the Council has imposed conditions and restrictions on Mr Gall's rights which are legal, necessary and proportionate in the in the interests of public safety, control of nuisance and the prevention of crime and disorder.

5.2 In any event the requirement for a PEL does not represent an absolute ban on informal music sessions. Where two or fewer performers provide musical entertainment the exemption referred to in paragraph 4.4 of this report would apply. Alternatively if musicians chose to make music together on premises operated as a private club a PEL would not be required although other legislation may apply.

No real surprise there as they would have to accept that their advice to the members had been wrong for over two years. But the question is, should the elected members take the advice of a 'first aider' or the advice of a Harley Street specialist.

It would appear, that they are prepared to accept the 'first aider's' diagnosis, that the patient is in perfect health, as they have persuaded the Chairman of this committee that my concerns should not be placed there to finally enable a democratic decision to be made.

Please feel free to circulate the following invitation which may appear in the official Weymouth Folk Festival programme. You will be made most welcome, if you do accept.

Brian Flynn and staff will be extending a warm welcome to all Weymouth Folk Festival attendees.

At The Cove House Inn, Chiswell, on the Isle of Portland.

An open invitation - starting with the regular tune session at 8.30 Thursday 8th May - is extended to all those who wish to make and enjoy folk music.

Come and join us from Saturday 10th May lunchtime – right through until the last festival survivors on Sunday night.

Friday 9th May - The Piano Dentists - will be performing.

Pop in to the good food and folk-friendly pub, right on Chesil Beach.
{Free parking}
Tel [phone].

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 24 Mar 03 - 07:57 PM

Despite being told by the Chairman that the issue of the council acting unlawfully, would go to the next meeting of the Licensing Committee, this was overruled by the officers and I still wait.

The latest I was told was that another Committee may be looking at it but the next meeting of this Committee is not due until JUNE!

That is after the festival and the council elections in May.

Any outside help, would be very welcome.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Mar 03 - 02:20 AM

This from the latest quarterly edition of Folk-on-tap.
[Snip]
This year, WE that is local performers Tin Leeming, Pauline Crenshaw, Bob Kirkpatrick, Karen Brown, Jo Quigley and some expert members of Frome Valley dance team, have already spent 8 months in the organisation of the 2003 event with something for everyone.

[The line up details follow, less any reference to any Portland events]

We hope that this message will allay any fears that Weymouth Folk Festival is not well and thriving. It has been brought to our notice that a few people are trying to link us the PEL debate. the local Weymouth and Portland musicians who are organising the festival have nothing to do with Central Government Law, and we do support the rest of the music world in its bid to have the law changed. Therefore we intend getting on with running an excellent festival and don't wish to waste time entering into political debate.

Just because the festival has some council funding, as many events do, that is no reason to deny and destroy the one thing we are all trying to promote - FOLK MUSIC. Ends

Any letters for publication to [e-mail]. Remeber that the events will be long-gone by the time the next edition is published.

Therefore we intend getting on with running an excellent festival and don't wish to waste time entering into political debate.

As this message is clearly entering into that political debate and supporting the council's position/lie that the local policy is a question for Central Government, what the above actually means is that these individuals, like most of the local councillors, are not prepared to challenge their council officer's interpretation of the current law.

The crazy thing is that the current law does support the distinction between paid performers and unpaid pub customers making their own music.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Apr 03 - 05:12 AM

It is 200 years ago to the day when a press gang arrived in Weymouth and directed by the Mayor of Weymouth - to Portland where the folk there were obviously considered by him to be more expendable than the young men of Weymouth.

There then followed what was known as the Easton Massacre and a number of Portland folk were killed that day. Subsequently the troops were acquitted.

Weymouth's legal officer's are using case-law from 1793 as support for their position. This really puts their advice to members in perspective as there was no Human Rights legislation then or indeed in 1803, when if you were playing music in pub, you ran the serious risk of being 'pressed' into the Royal Navy.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Apr 03 - 05:24 AM

On the following site there are some nice photos of Chiswell and of the Cove. Right at the bottom of the site is a bit more on the Easton Massacre and an inscription on the grave of one of those who died.

http://www.geoffkirby.co.uk/Portland/680735/

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Apr 03 - 08:19 AM

The following from the SCoFF newsletter.

Weymouth Folk Festival and Portland Sessions

A number of Chinese (and other) whispers have surfaced in local folk publications Solent Waves and Folk On Tap:

1) An obsolete telephone number for Weymouth Festival Enquiries was supplied to Solent Waves. Please disregard the printed number. Contacts are Nicky Jenkins (Publicity Officer) 01305 838566 (Office Hours only), Karen Brown (principal voluntary Organiser) 01305 812876 or Pavilion Box Office 01305 783225.

The Cove Inn on adjoining Portland, one of the venues where informal activities are being held, is on 01305 821407. As far as can be ascertained all contacts on websites (WPBC, Festival Team, Solent Waves and SCoFF Festivals) are correct. SCoFF has more detail on the Cove and also Artiste links.

2) Folk On Tap April-June 2003 has its usual article 'Dorset Scene and Heard' by Sophie Wright and Bob Axford (this is the 'Chinese Whispers' bit):

i) Referring to the paragraph headed '2-in-a-bar at Weymouth', p37, Roger Gall would like to point out that he is not a publican on Portland or anywhere else!
He is the Organiser for the Thursday Sessions at the Cove Inn on Portland, where the publican with whom he co-operates is Mr Brian Flynn, tel as above. The Cove is participating in Festival activities and Roger also wishes to point out that Portland would have been left out but for his intervention.

ii) The article fails to distinguish between Council Officers (who have been the actual agents of supression in the Weymouth and Portland Borough Council or 'WPBC' area) and the Councillors themselves, the elected representatives who have in fact been denied any voice in these decisions.

This is a complicated situation, since a Councillor wishing to go against the stated opinion of eg a Council Solicitor is effectively accusing that Officer of incompetence. Since the Solicitor in question refuses to reconsider that opinion in the face of considerable legal weight behind a contrary one, an impasse has developed. It hardly needs to be pointed out that it would take considerable moral courage to make the change.

iii) In their own estimation, Neither Roger Gall nor Brian Flynn wrote to booked performers for the Festival 'advising them not to come' as was stated in the article. The facts were laid before the public by Roger and others, not before performers particularly, via the internet, where they were invited to make up their own minds and encouraged in any case to write to the Council telling them what they thought of them.

iv) It is incorrect to write that 'The Council didn't make the law', since that is in fact exactly what they did. Here is recent (Lords, 11 December 2000) Government comment on the matter:

Whether members of the public who sing on licensed premises count as performers is a matter for the licensing authority to decide, depending on the circumstances. Ultimately, the compatibility of this provision with the European Convention on Human Rights would be a matter for the courts to determine.

It appears that this very ambiguity is to remain under the new provisions (although, of course, the 2-in-a-bar exemption is to go). It will certainly be up to Local Authorities to decide what live music is or is not 'incidental' to another activity (like drinking), as in the latest amendment, and all the signs are that any advertising, even by word of mouth, will disqualify it.

The Government should certainly continue to 'feel the weight of our angst', along with the Council.

I'm not about to transmit comments concerning the apropriateness or otherwise of political action, whether as SCoFF webmaster or as Fo'c'sle co-organiser. Jane & I, in our guise as Fo'c'sle Organisers, should report that we have written to the Council making clear our support for the Festival itself and its volunteer Organisers, and our appreciation of Council funding, but complaining bitterly about their performer policy.

We regard the replies received as highly misleading, not to say dishonest, and have told them as much. There has been no further response.

Southern Counties Folk Federation, SCoFF.
web.onetel.net.uk/~trevorgilson/SCoFF

Trevor Gilson, SCoFF Webmaster.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Apr 03 - 09:26 AM

The following from the Dorset Evening Echo 10 April 2003

May dates announced for second Weymouth festival.

STAGE SET FOR FEAST OF FOLK

Organisers are preparing for one of the largest festivals of folk to take place on the South Coast. The second Weymouth Folk Festival will take place in and around the town for three days in early May and the signs are that it will be even more successful than last year's event.

Local musicians such as Ken Watkins and The Yetties will be rubbing shoulders with international names including headliners The Oyster Band, guitar maestro Martin Simpson from Kentucky and Alexander Korbalov from Russia.

The Pavilion will be completely turned over to the festival, which runs from Friday, may 9, until Saturday, May 11, and various venues in the town will also be used.

Performers will be entertaining in five pubs – The White Hart, The Dorothy, Cove Inn on Portland, The Black Dog – as well as outside the Pavilion complex and at Brewers Quay.

There will also be a procession involving more than 25 sides of Morris dancers, Appalachian clog dancers and musicians.

Organiser Bob Kirkpatrick said: "We put last year' festival together in pretty short order and have had a year to plan this one, so I think it will be a tremendous success. "We are expecting dance teams from all over the South West including the Channel Islands and Bristol and we are expecting it to be the biggest festival outside Sidmouth and Wimborne."

He continued: "There will also be a fair mix of music, which is good. "We are not confining ourselves to just one type, but are covering the whole spectrum including some bluegrass." Co-organiser Karen Brown said: "We think that Weymouth is the ideal location for a folk festival because there is so much for families to do here. " There is the beach and the town centre and places to camp in the area – everything you need, really. "There is the potential for this to grow into something really big."

One of the highlights will be a craft fair in the Pavilion's Ocean Room on Sunday, May 11, featuring items handcrafted by traditional methods.

For full details of festival events and ticket details, call 01305 783 225.

Note that there is no mention here at all of Weymouth and PORTLAND Borough Council's organisation, funding or involvement…….. I wonder why? As there was a photo with the Council owned and run Pavilion Theatre in the background.

But there is mention of our Portland event at the Cove. I will be there all week-end at the best festival venue, the one that supports folk music all year round - and I hope to see you there too.

[e-mail]
has contacted me and has asked for my comments. Perhaps you could supply him with some of yours?

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 23 Apr 03 - 11:29 AM

Please feel free to circulate the following invitation which may (or may not)appear in the official Weymouth Folk Festival programme. You will be made most welcome, if you do accept.

Brian Flynn and staff will be extending a warm welcome to all Weymouth Folk Festival attendees.

At The Cove House Inn, Chiswell, on the Isle of Portland.

An open invitation - starting with the regular tune session at 8.30 Thursday 8th May - is extended to all those who wish to make and enjoy folk music.

Come and join us from Saturday 10th May lunchtime – right through until the last festival survivors on Sunday night.

Friday 9th May - The Piano Dentists - will be performing.

Pop in to the good food and folk-friendly pub, right on Chesil Beach.
{Free parking}
Tel [phone].

Will we be seeing anyone?

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 24 Apr 03 - 10:19 AM

For folk not following this thread - perhaps a word of explanation is called for, as I received the following and the writer may not be alone in this thinking.

This is an enticing invite, but haven't you been urging us for weeks to boycott Weymouth Folk Festival because of lack of sessions and attitudes of councillors?

Now I find it difficult to see how folk can expect this event in this form, to be widely supported by the folk community, but actually no I have not been urging folk to boycott Weymouth Folk Festival, as a careful read of this thread will show.

In truth I have urged people to convey their views to the council, over their policy, and many have done so and some of these have also said that they will boycott this festival. That must be a matter for them, but I have challenged folk who do their best to ignore the policy and advise others to do the same, in their desparation to hold this festival on terms dictated by the council.

This is not an easy situation.

However, this is an invite to informal participatory events organised on Portland - to take place during the weekend of the Weymouth and Portland Borough Council oganised Weymouth Folk Festival. I am just providing what I hope is an attractive alternative for folk who may feel reluctant to totally support the Council organised event.

Partly to show that I am not a kill-joy luddite.
Partly to show that folk events can take place on Portland (or indeed in Weymouth), without council money or oganisation.
And partly as a protest - but mainly to make some fine music!

For there are no official Weymouth Festival events planned to take place on Portland, even though Weymouth AND Portland Borough Council's money is funding this, the 2nd event. There may have been some excuse for last year's event, not covering Portland, but there is no such excuse this time.

I have not urged anyone to boycott anything - I have just been presenting the true facts to enable folk to make up their own mind - I am trying always to be positive, in rather negative times.....

You will be made very welcome.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 May 03 - 06:28 AM

See also Portland (UK) Folk weekend 8 - 11 May

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 May 03 - 02:39 AM

Weymouth Evening Echo 8 May 2003.

Musicians in folk boycott.

Enthusiasts from around the country claim they will stay away from the Weymouth Folk Festival in a row over entertainment licences.

Licensing laws state that premises hosting more than two people deemed to be singing, dancing or performing should have an entertainment licence.

Local campaigners claim Weymouth and Portland Borough Council, which is sponsoring this weekend's festival with Weymouth Folk Group, have stifled folk musicians by clamping down on informal sessions held at various unlicensed pubs in the borough.

The groups have now organised an alternative event on Portland for people unhappy with the council.
The programme of events at the Cove House Inn on Portland, which has a long association with folk music, has been organised by enthusiast Roger Gall who claims dozens of musicians have pledged support.

The boycott has been backed by top folk musician Eliza Carthy and comes after a small group of singers quit the New Star Inn on Portland after five years because the council warned the owners they needed a licence.

Mr Gall, from Portland, said: "I would like the main festival to be a success because it encourages folk music but the bottom line is that the council's attitude is ridiculous because they enforce this policy. A lot of people have opted to stay away because they feel strongly about this."

He added that the take-up figure of public entertainment licences in Weymouth and Portland was 30 per cent, compared with five per cent nationally. "The council obviously wants to maximise its revenue, particularly at the moment, but people from all over the country say they cannot support this festival because the council only supports folk music when the festival is on." Mr Gall said that he organised the alternative folk sessions because no events were planned for Portland.

"The council is called Weymouth and Portland but yet there's no official events on the island. It feels like Portland has been ignored," he said.

More than 1000 performers are set to attend this weekend's Weymouth Folk Festival from Friday to Sunday.
Highlights include a parade of dance, which sets off from the Jubilee Clock at 12.30pm on Saturday and heads for Weymouth Pavilion, with bands performing including The Oysterband and The Yetties.

Coun Brian Ellis, borough tourism spokesman, said: "There will be no boycott because the line up we have planned is an excellent one. The information I'm getting is that it will be well supported and the event is putting Weymouth on the folk music map."

Coun Ellis added that the row over entertainment licenses should be distanced from the festival.
"I'm a strong supporter of live performance and I do have concerns how the licensing legislation is interpreted by the borough. The borough needs to ensure the licensing isn't too harsh," he added.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 May 03 - 02:45 AM

Echo Comment 8 May 2003-05-08

Sad note for folk fans

A Government proposal to tighten the law on live music performances is one factor angering Dorset campaigners who are urging a boycott of this weekend's Weymouth Folk Festival.

But they are also not happy with Weymouth and Portland Borough Council, which they feel has been too zealous in its interpretation of the existing law in the context of informal traditional music performances in pubs.

The wrangle is brought into focus this weekend by the calls for a boycott of this weekend's folk festival sponsored by the council.

Musicians of all kinds, not just those whose first love is traditional music, are fighting for a change in the Government's stance, but, meanwhile, local authorities like the borough council have insisted music licenses are required for public performances, however informal they may be.

It is clear that a great many musicians and the owners of some venues, especially small pubs are concerned about the provisions of the new law. It now seems to have attracted widespread opposition, and many venues, we are told, been prompted to close their doors to live music.

Will a boycott by some people of Weymouth's festival produce anything other than divisions within the ranks of committed folk enthusiasts? Surely there must be a better way forward.

Replies to [e-mail]

This last question is a bit rich as it was this newspaper that first introduced the nice emotive word boycott, when they were fully aware that what was being urged was for people to express their views to the council on their policy - for these messages were also copied to them.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 May 03 - 02:59 AM

Letter to the Echo 10 May 2003.
Boycott will not stop legislation.

Does anyone seriously believe that boycotting the local folk festival will make any difference to the enforcing of music performance legislation? I don't think so.

I don't like the existing or the proposed new legislation but, to be fair to Weymouth and Portland Borough Council, it has a duty to enforce the existing legislation when informed of an infringement.

You might like to ask Roger Gall just who it was who brought the 'Star' folk session on Portland to the attention of the council, thus ensuring that enforcement had to be carried out.

I believe that you are also confusing singer Eliza Carthy's opposition to the new PELS legislation with Roger Gall's opposition to the existing 'Two in a bar' rule.

Your lead article was misleading and unhelpful to a local event.

Nigel Canter


Replies to [e-mail]

You could ask Roger Gall who brought the attention of the New Star session to the council. As it is he appears to wish to know, you could also ask Mr Canter why he does not ask Roger Gall himself or why this would aspect would appear to matter to him, far more than what the officers then do with this information.

If it really matters how or more importantly when this information came to the officer's attention, it is difficult to understand why Mr Canter, such a firm supporter of duty and of upholding legislation would expect me to do anything other than my duty. Surely he would not expect me to withhold this information, to break the law and make the public unsafe? *Smiles*

The above is a good example of how foolish enforcement of this foolish legislation and a desperation for a council festival gig, will makes fools of many.

For enforcement is only necessary when it has been established that a licensable activity is taking place. As the licensing officers did not visit the New Star session, this was never established, unlike the many visits to the Cove.

Whatever this council's duty may be, it surely should be a fair and consistent duty. So perhaps Mr Canter would like to ask the council to explain the contrast in their officer's efforts to try and avoid visiting or seeing the New Star session with the many visits and determination to prevent identical activities at the Cove.

The New Star session took place for over five years in total, and over two years since the Cove's enforcement, when its nature and location, as I was informed by the then councillor for this ward - was 'common knowledge'.

The question that needs to be asked is why would anyone wish to report this session, over two years later? It is a matter of clear record that I have spent the two years since the Cove action   (unsuccessfully but without revealing the name of the premises) in trying to change the council's policy to ensure that the New Star session could in fact continue without a PEL.

You could also ask what exactly Mr Canter or the other participants were doing to assist in this aim or in the aim of addressing the new legislation, both of which he claims to dislike?

I am not going to write to the Echo to correct Mr Canter as he will choose to believe and blame what is convenient, as i feel this action from me will continue to personalise an important issue. I would be grateful if others could write with their comments however.

But it has been explained how my new ward councillor took the common knowledge complete with the name of the continuing New Star session to the officers. He did not want to be compromised by holding this information about illegal activities, decided to do his duty and inform the Licensing Manager about the New Star session. They immediately issued the letter that sadly resulted in the end of the long-running event.

I continue in my attempt to change the policy that would allow the New Star session it to re-start, without a PEL. Perhaps Mr Canter would care to help?

I am first a musician who along with many others, has directly suffered from this policy, I have tried my best to ensure that no one else will. The idea that is conveniently whispered locally that I am a politically motivated zealot, who is prepared to sacrifice anything to achieve some selfish end, is just not borne out by the facts. But some folk are not interested in facts, they just interfere with a good, if improbable story.

As for the 'boycott' - people were informed the facts and urged to express their views to Weymouth and Portland Borough Council over their policy under current legislation. This policy is the root cause of these problems and divisions, it also is a solid fact to be faced, that it presents the risk to the success or otherwise of the council organised Weymouth Folk Festival. The point was to highlight the threat the policy presented, in order that this totally unnecessary threat could be removed. This would enable this festival to be supported by the whole folk community. Sadly the council decided just to keep on wading neck-deep into the Big Muddy.

As for The Echo being confused –

Daily Telegraph
Battle over 'last orders' for music
(Filed: 18/01/2003)
Musicians and publicans fear that the new Licensing Bill will impose a tax on music-making that many will be unable to pay. By Colin Randall
(snip)
"They were like part of the family," says Christine Radford, who says she has been driven by red tape and diminishing income to consider quitting the licensed trade. "I was in tears on their last night."
Tom Grainger, the council's chief executive, points out that 30 per cent of licensed premises in the area have PELs and would protest if a blind eye were turned to others. He denies that the council approach has changed and says it is "most unfortunate" that Eliza Carthy and other musicians are urging a boycott of the council-sponsored folk festival in May.

There is a difference between an individual choosing not to attend or support an event, being sympathetic to others taking this course, and organising and actively urging others to do the same. The media know this difference but a nice emotive word like 'boycott' is preferred.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 May 03 - 03:10 AM

It has to be said that Eliza did have reservations about the Daily Telegraph article and did convey these to the writer. Sadly I was not aware of this until after the Echo's article appeared.

She was not urging anyone to boycott the Weymouth Folk Festival.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 May 03 - 06:05 AM

I have sent the following letter to the Echo. I don't suppose this will be printed either.

The Echo's comment 8 May 2003, expresses concern over divisions among folk enthusiasts over a folk festival 'boycott'. However I would like to point out that this word was first introduced in the Echo on 27 December 2002. If 'groups' were urging people not to attend, there may some justification in the use of this word. This was not what was being urged by any 'group' and these are not the divisions that should be of most concern.

People were informed the facts and urged to express their views to Weymouth and Portland Borough Council over their policy and copy these to the Echo. This policy is the root cause of all these supposed divisions, it also presents the risk to the success or otherwise of the council organised Weymouth Folk Festival. The point was to highlight the threat the policy presented, in order that this totally unnecessary threat could be removed. As it can so very easily be removed, where there is a will locally to do so.

That the row over entertainment licenses should be distanced from the festival is the wish of many, whose business is not politics. However, councillors, whose business it is, have known for a long time that it was their local policy that presented the threat to its success - as Peter Chegwyn, both an elected councillor and festival organiser in Gosport, pointed out clearly in his letter to the Echo 1st January 2003. "I am afraid Tom Grainger chief executive of Weymouth and Portland Borough Council, is sadly mistaken if he thinks his council's over-zealous enforcement of outdated laws relating to live music venues will not affect the council's own folk music festival in 2003."   

So why was this policy not reviewed by a policy making committee prior to this event, as energetically requested for over two years, and advice not sought from people like Peter Chegwyn, to see if the threat could be removed, especially in the 4 months since the Echo's first story? The answer is that the Council's non- elected officers had just as energetically resisted this request.

There will no doubt be loud claims from the Council of how successful this 2nd event was. This should not disguise the fact that with a little joined-up thinking from our officers and a bit more courage shown by our councillors in challenging them, the event could have been even more successful, as the honest efforts of all those working on the ground, both paid and unpaid, so richly deserve.

The threat is not a boycott, but the Council is in competition. There are many folk festivals and there are others on this same weekend. If outside folk are to be attracted to this one, the Council need good public relations and not to be seen as leading official kill-joys (as they are currently). A change of policy, even at this late stage will guarantee that good publicity…………… Does your councillor support this view? For I have not found one who does. So why then does this borough hold this damaging policy when it is clear that they do NOT have to?

Will our elected members finally review this unpopular policy and remove this threat?

Currently this local policy means for example that The National Anthem sung by three unpaid pub customers every Friday night, will be considered in this borough as 'performers' in a 'performance' of public entertainment. This will be illegal and deemed to have made the safe, inspected and already licensed premises - unsafe without additional payment and application to the Council for a Public Entertainment Licence. The licensee will be liable to a £20,000 fine or six months in prison if this singing takes place without a PEL.

The Echo's editorial comment ignores the second threat, which is the important point that for the second time no official festival events were planned for Portland.

Councillor Ellis also in the Echo 8 May 2003, may feel that "the event is putting Weymouth on the folk music map" (Portland apparently not even appearing as in a little box in the corner).

But this is the point is where the serious divisions are being engendered by this lack of joined-up thinking. Surely when the Borough of Weymouth and Portland funds events it should be the whole Borough that benefits and Weymouth AND Portland, being put on the map?

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 May 03 - 05:14 PM

Dorset Echo May 12
Thousands of visitors enjoy a variety of entertainment despite fears over a licences boycott.
FUN-FILLED FESTIVAL OF FOLK
http://www.thisisdorset.net/dorset/weymouth/news/WEYMOUTH_NEWS_NEWS6.html

More than 1,000 performers showed off their talents when Weymouth's second Folk Festivalswung into action at the weekend. Solo artists, groups, bands, Appalachian dancers and Morris sides performed at a variety of venues – and folk lovers from across the county and country poured into town.

The festival went ahead despite a rival Portland event held to protest at entertainment licences.

Local campaigners claimed that joint festival sponsors Weymouth and Portland Borough Council had stifled folk musicians by clamping down on informal sessions held at various unlicensed pubs in the borough.

But fears that a massive boycott might hit the festival proved unfounded as folk lovers flocked to enjoy the entertainment.

Weymouth Folk Group, who also sponsored the festival, said it was delighted with the response to this year's event, while the council's leisure and entertainments manager Simon King said there had been a huge amount of support from local pubs. he added that the event was now one of Britain's fastest growing festivals.

Mr King said: "The Council and Weymouth Folk Club are working to make this a festival to rival Sidmouth and this year's line-up proved that we are on the way to this goal."

Among highlights were a grand parade of dance from the Jubilee Clock to the Pavilion Theatre. There were also great performances from Last Night's Fun, and folk fans also enjoyed The Oysterband, Martin Simpson, The Yetties, Munday Turner workshops, concerts, late night sessions, morris dancing, ceilidhs, a folk village, dancing, busking and pub sessions.

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: MairSea
Date: 13 May 03 - 10:33 AM

As an 'out of towner' who came to the festival at the weekend and thoroughly enjoyed it I think that the council's policy on parking will kill off the festival more than anything else!

We stayed in a B&B on the front where we could park overnight but had to move to the Pavilion car park before 1000 each morning. This meant that my husband could not 'have a drink' for the weekend as he is the only driver. We had hoped that there would have been parking for the B&B's so that we could have enjoyed a good night's rest and walked along to the Pavilion Fri/Sat and then left from the Pavilion car park on the Sunday. Had we not been to last year's festival and been aware of the reduction in charges for those visiting the Theatre we too, would have been paying £6 per day in parking charges! Parking charges plus accomodation charges together with the 75% increase in the Weekend Season ticket really made it an expensive weekend. Thankfully the line up, the workshops and the friendliness made up for the high costs. Because of the difficulty in parking etc. we were unable to go over to Portland to the Cove Inn to enjoy some of the music there - sorry!!

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 May 03 - 11:24 AM

Because of the difficulty in parking etc. we were unable to go over to Portland to the Cove Inn to enjoy some of the music there - sorry!!

I'm sorry too - for the parking on Portland was free. Maybe next time?

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 May 03 - 03:01 AM

Echo letter 13 May 2003

Inn's folk sessions were integral part of festival

As part of the group that organised the second Weymouth festival, I was disturbed to read (Musicians in folk boycott, Thursday) that the sessions at the Cove House Inn on Portland were apparently not part of the festival.

This was news to me and to my fellow organisers. Mr Gall was asked by the member of the group organising the pub sessions on behalf of us all, to run sessions at the Cove House as part of the festival and he agreed to this back in March. Far from being an alternative event, the sessions were regarded as an integral part of the festival.

Incidentally, Eliza Carthy was never invited, nor, as far as I am aware declared her intention to be a part of the festival, so I find it difficult to see how she could be boycotting it. As a Portland resident I, like Mr Gall, am keen to see Portland included in future festival proceedings.

Pauline Clenshaw
(One of the Folk Festival organisers)
Greenways
Portland.

It is rather sad that none of the current batch of local writers of letters to the Echo, could not have been doing this for the last two years, over the council's policy. Which deprived Portland of one session and would have deprived us of another, if the licnsee had not been prepared to pay for the PEL to enable it.

If they had there would be no need now for any of this bad feeling, bitterness and personally motivated gossip being placed publicly in the newspaper, rather than presenting me with it personally first. In fairness, a lot of the Echo's festival coverage is incorrect, including the pro festival 'spin'. This is the nature of the press, however I do stand by what appears as my quotes. These are nearly what I actually said.

Dear ...

I attach the following letter that I intend to send to the Echo.

As you are well aware my facts are correct and can all easily be confirmed, as detailed. Before I take any further action, I would like to first give you the opportunity to ask Pauline if she will write to the Echo and confirm that the information she supplied (I suspect in all good faith), was incorrect.

Perhaps you could advise as soon as possible so this can be cleared up without any more unnecessary bad-feeling being created?

Roger

[Proposed letter.]
Re-writing festival history?

Pauline Clenshaw, Echo letter 13 May, claims that I was asked to organise sessions on Portland for the Weymouth Folk Festival. If she checks the permanent email record about my possible involvement over the festival weekend, she will find that her claim is incorrect.

The record will show that I was offered or expected to be leading a session in Weymouth and a list of Weymouth only venues were supplied. On receipt of this list, the record will show that I expressed that my loyalties should lie with the licensee of the Cove House Inn on Portland, who supported folk music all year round, and where our regular Thursday session was held.

The emails will show that I declined the offer to lead a session in Weymouth and after checking with the licensee, declared that I would be running a session on Portland instead. I then made the request for this additional event to be placed in the official programme.

Had I accepted the original offer, it is a fact that there would have been no festival events - either integral or alternative, taking place on Portland, for the second year of this Weymouth and Portland Borough Council organised event.

I do not welcome her attempts to re-write history but I do welcome Pauline Clenshaw being so keen now to see Portland included in any future festival proceedings. The mystery is why she did not ensure that the Council organised some for this 2nd event?

For the emails will also show that I did also request that perhaps a Morris side or two from the Weymouth festival could visit The Cove, as the licensee indicated that this also would be most welcome.

Perhaps all this can be confirmed and corrected in these pages when the facts are checked?

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 May 03 - 09:53 AM

Echo letters 14 May 2003

I didn't urge boycott of festival

I seem to have been misrepresented in my opinions regarding whether or not the general public should have boycotted the Weymouth Folk Festival.

Whilst I condemn the local council for rigorously and heavy-handedly enforcing the current 'two-in-a-bar' licensing law and closing harmless culturally important and enjoyable folk sessions in local pubs, I would never urge the boycott of a valuable community event.

Folk music is a genre and culture under-represented in the media and in terms of funding and I applaud the council for continuing to support this event, if not others.

I have no wish to alienate the council or the festival's participants and organisers; nor do I have any wish to deprive fellow performers of work.

To set the record straight, what I said (in a Daily Telegraph article) was that there was "likely to be a boycott".

I continue to support campaigners in their efforts to guide the Government in its proposed new Bill (which is entirely another kettle of fish and would need a much longer letter!).

Eliza Carthy
North Dalton,
East Yorks

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 May 03 - 02:56 PM

Letter to the Echo 15 May, 2003
Alternative festival is an empty gesture

Congratulations are due to the organisers of the Weymouth Folk Festival. A couple of hiccups, yes; but overall it was a tremendously successful event that was enjoyed by all who participated – performers and audience alike.

I and many, many others look forward to next year's event.

If one must pick a particular fly in the folk ointment, then it must be the unfortunate intervention of Mr Roger Gall (as reported on the front page of the Echo on May 8 ('Musicians in Folk Boycott').

I am struck by the apparent contradiction in the position of Mr Gall's position, who proposed a boycott of the Folk Festival in Weymouth. He declared that there were no venues on Portland, yet on each day of the festival an event was scheduled for the Cove on Portland, and each of those events was to be hosted ny none other than Mr Roger Gall.

Mr Gall claims that he was protesting about the borough council's policy in respect of licensing live music in the town. To hold an 'alternative' festival in the very borough he hoped to embarrass seems to me something of an empty gesture.

After all, Portland is part of the borough council's purview and subject to the same rules concerning live music. It might have made more sense for Mr gall to have descended on Dorchester.

This is even before one considers the 'alternative' line-up. More than one Portlander has described it to me as embarrassing. I was pleased to see the number of people from Portland (musicians and audience) who were at the festival proper.

This is not the first outburst from Mr Gall – who some see as a man whose pronouncements have been actually been harming the cause of live music in Weymouth and Portland.

The borough council's policy in respect of live music is not the best, but it is pretty good. One would be hard pressed to find another town in the South West with such a lively, diverse and prospering music scene.

Indeed one of the things that holidaymakers frequently cite as one of the reasons they enjoy their visits to Weymouth – and Portland.

That would hardly be the case if the strictures really were as draconian as Mr Gall insists.   

Ian Sedwell
Greenhill
Weymouth

Subject: RE: Weymouth Folk Festival (UK)
From: The Shambles
Date: 16 May 03 - 07:51 AM

The Echo has not published my letter.

The feely offfered and promised letter from my ward councillor stating that it was he who informed the officers about the new Star session, has also not appeared.

If you would care to write to them, they may well publish yours.

[e-mail]