I don't think we do our cause any good by implying that music doesn't cause disturbance, or that all complaints are unjustified.

We possibly wouldn't, if that was the implication being made but any complaints about noise should not result in all non-amplified live music being prevented.

It is interesting to note that the Dorchester example was not a licensing hearing but a planning meeting. It shows additional entertainment licensing, which is defended as a way of heading-off potential problems relating to live music in advance - is now expensive duplication of the planning process.

And as any real noise concerns that do actually arise later, can be dealt with by the Environmental Protection legislation - additional entertainment licensing can be scrapped without any adverse affect on the public.