PEL's cost different amounts in different local authorities and sometimes the LA either makes a very high charge for a PEL or uses a PEL as a second bite at the planning cherry and forcing expensive alterations to premises.   As a consequence, there is believed to be widespread avoidance by restricting entertainment to members of a club. There is also believed to be widespread evasion where organisations operate without a PEL.

I think that does sum up pretty well the thinking behind the entertainemt aspect of this Act. Which is sad. Because it is why this half-assed Act is such a mess and presents so many problms to aspect of music making that the drafters of it, never took the trouble to find out about or addressed when these aspects were brought to their attention.

The Act combines these two licences into one at a nationally fixed fee and explicitly prevents any conditions that could have been made as planning requirements. It also makes some exclusions regarding what entertainment needs to be licensed.

Perfectly logical ones, like the one for live Sky TV coverage of football matches in pubs? Based of course only on the safety concerns of the four objectives of the Act.