I think that any legislation that is delegated to Local Government to enforce is problematic. For anyone who falls foul of its interpretation at local level is told that it IS the law and any approach to change it - must be made to Central Government. When anyone does this - the response from Central Government is that it is a matter for Local Government.

It is a wonderful 'cop-out' for both sides but we all seem to end up the losers. The answer must be for us to ensure that the legislation IS tested and tested early - so that we all know where we stand and whether it is the interpretation by Local Government that is wrong and needs to change to comply with the legislation - or if the legislation itself needs to be changed. The following is an example of what we must try to avoid happening under the new Act.

Despite being responsible for preventing sessions locally - for the lack of a PEL - my LA's officers have written to advise my MP that they consider that a series of two different performers would not be exempt (under the two-in-a-bar rule) but are still maintaining that (some) pubs holding advertised open mic nights do not currently require PELs.

Because of the mess they have gotten themselves into - it now suits the officer's purpose to do this. But quite how they manage it - is a mystery that despite my best efforts to find out - looks as if it will remain one.