Sorry for coming in late on this but the public safety issue is an important one. We have heard so far about two our three musicians just turning up at a pub and having a session and I agree that this should present no problem. That is however just one extreme of the equation.

Suppose on the other hand those three musicians were major names and said they would be back next week. Word gets round and the pub is then packed to the rafters - and a fire breaks out. Legally the publican has a duty of care to ensure the place is safe; he knew about the possibility of the larger crowd than he could safely hold and did nothing about it so he is liable for any claims regarding injuries or deaths which may occur. To far fetched? Think on the problems caused by fires at illegal raves with no safety measures in place.

If we take the barriers down here we also need to look at other areas. Boxing for example - just some guys having fun and enjoying themselves so why all the fuss about medical cover right? Or football, 60000 people gathered together to support their respective teams so why do the police need to be involved? Yes I know the last two questions are total nonsense but anyone could put up an argument for exemption to suit their particular circumstances.

Sorry if this response goes against the grain of the thread. I really do think that common sense should be applied and provided there is no evidence of public saftey being compromised then let the music play. But are we not going to inevitably become victims of our own success in that the more we play, the better we get and the more people will come so the risk increases. When do we apply the brakes? It's much easier to stop the car just as it starts rolling downhill than it is to try and stop it at the bottom.