Today's reply from TG

I can't see any disagreement or inconsistency in my reply with Ian Locke's recent letter. As I recall Ian was pointing out that the reasons for PELs (ie the justification for the legislation) was primarily health& saftey/ noise. (Indeed I referred to this in a previous email). What I have said is that irrespective of whether we believe there are particular Health & safety or noise concerns with a particular premise, the trigger for a requirement for a PEL is the taking place of entertainment. By itself, that doesn't make a PEL inappropriate.

Thank you for asking for agreement to publish my replies. I have no objections. After all I think our aims are similar - to ensure musicians interests are not unreasonably curtailed