It is tricky, by giving the responsibility for enforcing the act, as it has already been pointed out, to the L.A's. it deflects any criticism of the working of the Act away from the legislature that enacted it, if it's vague enough then they can't be blamed for the interpretation. However, this maybe a life line, lobbying councillors is far easier than lobbying M.P's., target the licensing committee, offer to "help" them through the Act and if needs be set up informal ground rules, self regulating. The fly in the ointment, of course, is that a significant majority of L.A's. are "executive" led, they rubber stamp what the paid officials "advise" them to do. What I fear is happening is that L.A's. that preside over areas who's main income is derived from tourism then the department responsible for promoting tourism has a big say in how the act is interpreted, this manifests itself in a more liberal interpretation of the Act when applied to music venues. Indeed, I think it has already been mentioned, if not in this thread then others, that some enlightened L.A's. are actually licensing several area's which they own to cover informal events.
What ever is happening it seems that enforcement and dissent are piece meal and disorganised. Maybe, just maybe, if we pooled our resources and picked off one Authority after another, even one Authoriy, then some coherent, unambigous policy might be arrived at. This, I fear, will run for much longer.