The following was posted (by Peter) on uk.music.folk.

AI 176

Rant

Sebastian Scotney, who runs the Jazz Development Trust, reports hotfoot
from the battle over the 2003 Licensing Act (and sent me this email)

For regular readers of this column in search of their quick fix of
industrial strength rant, just read Richard Morrison's loud and clear take
on unnecessary legislation.

"What we have seen over the past nine years has been an unprecedented
increase in the number of political diktats that attempt to regiment every
facet of our existence - from health, diet and education to the law and
liberty. At the root of this trend are power mania and arrogance. We are
now ruled by people who [.] want to control the smallest aspects of our
lives [.]. The endless, pointless meddling of recent years has simply
stopped good people doing their jobs well" he wrote in The Times on
September 26.

You're feeling better already. But if you read on, you're in for a
heart-stirring underdog battle being fought on one such diktat affecting
the arts. Line up here for the UK culture sector's version of the McLibel
Two, a farmers' co-operative from Mali taking on Monsanto, or indeed David
v Goliath.

The issue at stake is whether wide screens and stereos with powerful
amplification have legal rights to entertain the public which are not
accorded to the ordinary citizens of England and Wales - whether indeed
live performers need to be subject to a degree of control which is deemed
unnecessary in virtually the whole of the rest of Europe.

In the David corner, a tenacious man with an unrivalled knowledge of all
things licensing called Hamish Birchall; and in the Goliath corner the
DCMS's Live Music Forum, summoned and marshalled by civil servants,
usually fronted by the Ulster hellfire preaching tones of Feargal Sharkey.
"They warned that a plague of locusts would descend."

The DCMS gave the forum two main roles: first it was to spin the virtues
of the Act, and second to promote a politically convenient message about a
thriving live music scene. Or, translated into Sir Humphrey-speak, it was
to "take forward the ministerial commitment to maximise the take-up of
reforms in the Licensing Act 2003 relating to the performances of live
music" and "to promote the performance of live music generally".

With its third task, to monitor the effects of the Act, there has always
been the danger that it would either be in contradiction with, or be
subsumed into, the other two. Faced with this inconvenience, DCMS civil
servants must have been sorely tempted to adopt the Groucho Marx solution:
"Look, why should we quarrel about a thing like this? We'll take it right
out, eh?"

But if they ever thought they might, they weren't reckoning on Birchall's
tenacity, drive and detailed knowledge. He has been a consistent thorn in
the side of the DCMS as they attempt to put a positive spin on the effects
of the Act for live music. A complaint about misleading conclusions said
to be based on MORI research was upheld by the Market Research Society.
The DCMS then tried to cover their tracks by amending the press release.

Birchall has also brought to wide public attention some of the laughable
inconsistencies and absurdities if the Act. Here are three examples of his
work:

In March 2006 Westminster Council confirmed to the Radio 4 Today programme
that culture secretary Tessa Jowell herself had committed an offence
against her own department's Act by singing at an advertised public event
in Victoria Park Gardens.

In May BBC director general Mark Thompson found himself in the absurd
position of having to beg BBC employees to attend a recording of Top of
the Pops following legal advice that an audience constituted of members of
the public would put the event in breach of the Act.

And only last month the DCMS was forced to put out a "clarification" on
carol singing which is beyond satire: if a performance is "spontaneous,
incidental to other activities or part of a religious service", it is not
licensable; however, if a carol concert has an audience it will be
regulated entertainment and will need a licence. So does that include a
group of carol singers performing on a station concourse or in a shopping
centre? "If a carol service is organised, advertised and provided for an
audience there would seem to be little doubt that this would be
licensable" says the department, according to the Daily Telegraph on
December 11.

These three examples show that this law is a few fetlocks short of an ass.

Birchall's valuable work continues.

If you want to be better informed sign up for his regular emails at
hamishbirchall@yahoo.co.,uk

There is also a No 10 petition at ?http://petitions.pm.gov/licensing/