This from Hamish Birchall

For circulation

Various people have asked me to provide guidance for a letter to be sent to MPs or Peers. I would always say it is best to write your own letters because standard letters get binned. With that caveat in mind, however, here is a short letter which Musicians' Union members, or indeed anyone with an interest, can adapt for their own purposes to send to MPs. It could easily be modified for interested Peers as well (bearing in mind that many are in fact sympathetic to MU members concerns). The address of the House of Commons is London SW1A OAA, and the House of Lords is London SW1A OWP. You can also fax MPs direct from www.faxyourmp.com:

Dear

Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell says that the Licensing Bill is 'a major plank in the government's drive in the Queen's Speech to tackle antisocial behaviour'.


That is a laudable aim, but it doesn't really explain the Bill's requirement that all live music in churches, except where incidental to a religious meeting or service, should be a criminal offence unless licensed. The are only four licensing aims: the prevention of crime and disorder, prevention of noise nuisance, public safety, and the protection of children from harm. Is there any evidence that church concerts are a serious problem on any of these four counts? If not there is no justification for extending licensing control.



Private carol concerts raising money for charity would, likewise, become illegal unless licensed, in churches or anywhere else. Carol singing, out and about, would similarly become illegal unless licensed. The maximum penalty for unlicensed performance would be a £20,000 fine and six months in prison. These measures cannot be described as deregulatory or liberalising.



Culture Minister Kim Howells claims abolition of the two in a bar rule is necessary because 'one musician with modern amplification can make more noise than three without'. Why then is he proposing that one unamplified performer in a bar should become illegal unless licensed? And, if unamplified performers must be so controlled, why will amplified broadcast entertainment, which includes not only sport but music, be exempt? Nothing in the Bill requires licensees to disclose the provision of broadcast entertainment, or jukeboxes, or to disclose the amplification power of the equipment used. There are, of course, many more noise complaints about recorded music than about live music.

The Musicians' Union believes that, as far as incidental live music in bars and restaurants is concerned, a simpler solution would be to adopt the Scottish licensing regime. In that country no prior permission or licence is required for live music in that context, providing it finishes within permitted hours. Public entertainment licensing applies after permitted hours and in all premises whose main business is music, or music and dancing. Noise and safety legislation regulating such premises applies across the whole UK.

Yours etc