Sham, Andy doesn't have to say any more than he wants to.

That of course is his choice and he has explained his reasons.

And mine is to make this request and I have explained these reasons.

My view is that at this point there can certainly be no fear that further harm can be done to this year's aborted Miskin event by explaining what the interpretation was and how this event was affected by the Licensing Act 2003.

That is the whole point of this thread, which is of limited use without such detail.

And I suggest that far less harm will be done to any future local events if those who are affected are supplied with the correct details of this one's demise.

With the infomation already supplied publicly there will only be speculation. And with this, the possibilty that far more harm will   result locally and eleswhere from any attempt to withold the true facts? You never know - with these people armed with the truth - this
may actually help the local situation.

For the truth is out there. The interpretation used is fact.

If it does not have legal support - it can be challenged and other local authorities be persuaded not to follow it. If it does have legal support then it is important to know what it is so that it can be changed.

You would agree that anyone has the right to write a letter to the L.A concerned in order to ask them what their interpretation is. Hopefully no one will have to do this and the information requested will be freely and helpfully supplied here.