DT There is no definition of spontaneous within the Bill or elsewhere for the purposes of the Bill. The point is that what most people understand to be spontaneous singing or dancing would not count as the provision of regulated entertainment under the Bill (because it would not satisfy the conditions in Schedule 1) and would not, therefore, require a licence.

DT In reference to your more specific point - it is hard to see how a regular event could be regarded as spontaneous. Those performing/attending must presumably have known that it would happen and turned up accordingly. That is certainly not what I understand to be spontaneity.

Then why insist on using the word, if a definition of the bloody word does not appear in the Bill?

Things are what they are. These people are trying to make actual activities fit to the words and concepts that they invent, claim to understand, but don't define. This is quite quite mad.

For if a session does not fit with a civil servant's idea of a word that he has come up with it must be regulated entertainment..............

But it remains is what it is and they will just have to find another way to describe it. It is the whole spark, the magic, the very essence of why we take part in music...and because they can't come up with a word for it, it is reduced to 'regulated' entertainment. Help us please!

Of course a regular event can be 'spontaneous', in musical sense. As Segovia says music must be an explosion of freedom.

All live music is always 'spontaneous'. The word could be exchanged and used instead of saying live music. It is a concept that a civil servant has little chance of ever understanding, as this exchange sadly shows.

These people have not listened for 3 years, they are not going to start now. They can talk though...........

Don't waste your time with them.