Here is a post I put up on the Online forum about the Licensing Bill, which came out of the online petition (which right at this point has ...48994 Total Signatures!).

So I thought I'd put it here as well, because I think we are in danger of thinking too negatively and defensively, and losing sight of the possibility that this could all work out very much for the best.

When this whole issue became a matter for discussion a couple of years ago we were thinking and talking about how reform of the law cold make things better. Thanks to this cack-handed Bill we've switched our attention to pointing out how it is likely to make things worse.

But we should never forget that the existing situation which we are finding ourselves defending is pretty dire. Maybe we should focus on how the Bill could be changed in a way that would actually make things a lot better.

So far as most of the things we are worried about this could be achieved - by a simple addition of a clause in the Exemptions section of the Bill, which is at Schedule 2 Part 2.

I suggest something on these lines:

"The provision of any entertainment or entertainment facilities or participation in such activities where the primary purpose is for the mutual enjoyment of performers is not to be regarded as the provision of regulated entertainment for the purposes of this Act."

If we had this (and it is in fact in line with the "promises" that Kim Howells has been throwing out every time he gets cornered), it would mean that we could at last make music anywhere where the proprietors had no objection, so long as we didn't make excessive noise, or cause excessive crowding. Pubs, cafes, fish and chip shops... We'd have the same freedom in this respect as people in Scotland or Ireland. Informal music could flourish in a way it has never been allowed to in our lives and the lives of our parents and grandparents.

(A similar approach could be taken to deal with the worries about school performances, for example - additional clauses in the exemption section.)