Latest from Hamish Birchall.

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport have issued a press notice today headed:

KIM HOWELLS PLEDGES TO REFORM THE 'TWO MUSICIANS RULE'

The pledge was made at the MODAL 'non-mainstream' music conference in Sheffield. The press release should be available on the DCMS website: www.culture.gov.uk - but when I checked at 6.25pm this evening (12 April) it was not yet there. In the copy I have obtained he says: 'I am firmly committed to the reform and modernisation of our archaic and at times, wholly stupid, licensing laws. I do not need persuasion that the "two musicians rule" is outdated and pointless.'

He adds: 'Simply abolishing the two musicians rule is not enough. Abolition would remove the exemption and make it harder and more costly for pubs to put on singers and other musical performers. Our approach is to simplify and integrate the licensing regimes so that it is easier and less expensive for pubs to obtain the necessary permission to stage musical performances. These reforms have to be introduced through primary legislation - there is no quick fix.'

This is a step forward. About two years ago a DCMS civil servant told me: 'if you are hoping for a Ministerial statement you won't get one'.

In this latest press notice Howells again says that reform will come only 'when Parliamentary time permits'. At the conference he did apparently suggest that a Bill in November is very likely. The DCMS also issued a fuller text of his speech as a separate document, with the caveat 'Check with delivery'. Many of you will know that Howells has a reputation for 'throwaway' ad libs.

The speech text includes this: 'Those of you who wish to campaign about the reforms need not therefore preach to the converted. I was converted long ago. But the more support that you can generate for our Bill among the wider public the better. There are people out there who think the Bill is only about alcohol. It is much broader than that and will bring much greater flexibility for the music industry too. Keep spreading the message and we will deliver on our promises.'

When the Government leaks news of the imminent licensing Bill the press reports focus almost exclusively on the possibility of 24-hour drinking. The Government is responsible for that emphasis and should not ask musicians to advocate on its behalf to compensate for their deliberate omission of the cultural remit.

We still do not know how the Goverment proposes to eliminate the risk, identified in the licensing White Paper, that musicians could lose work as a result of abolition of the two performer exemption. The latest round of consultation (Draft Instructions to Parliamentary Counsel) which went to about 30 organisations including the MU and Arts Council, has already been criticised in the trade press as a retreat from the Ministry of Fun to the Ministry of Law and Order. It would appear, for example, that providing just one unamplified performer once a month in a bar would require prior local authority permission. Licensees would face the same potential penalty (£20,000 fine and six months in jail) for providing that entertainment without first declaring their intention to provide it in the new licence application and getting local authority approval. It is still not clear whether the new licence would cost more if live entertanment is provided.

As with most Government statements, treat this one with a degree of scepticism.