[snip] Does that mean that all the young 'clubbers' of England and Wales, also 'dancing for fun', will not require their premises to be licensed? [/snip]

Well it does seem that the Department keeps getting its wires crossed and I now have got two occasions when the civil servant has written to me and said words previously written do not mean what they say.

The first occasion was that the standard letter to MP's from Kim Howells says " We need to have a reliable definition of what constitutes a public performance and it is clear that if a musician or other performer is accepting money for a performance then it is a public performance".

I queried this pointing out that Clause 188 defines premises as "any place" and asking why therefore if I charge for a ceilidh (public performance) at a wedding in a private marquee on private land (any place) I am not attracting the need for a licence.

The reply came as follows:

   I understand why there is some misunderstanding over the sentence you quote from the letter that Dr Howells sent to Helen Jackson. In isolation it does appear that any case where a performer is paid counts as a public performance. I think that it is clear from the letter as a whole that this is not what is meant.

So "words clearly do not mean what they say they mean" number 1.

The second occasion was after the Radio One broadcast when I asked why Howells said that he had not received advice that wide screen TV was not dangerous when he clearly had received such advice from ACPO.

This time the reply was:

My interpretation is that in the sentence you have highlighted Dr Howells was referring to the two in bar rule, not to television. My press colleagues here have confirmed this.

I haven't yet made sense of that one but it counts as number two.

I have asked him to repeat the phrase "dancing for fun....." to make sure I understood it properly pointing out the logic that if "dancing for fun....." is not to be licensed then clearly singing and playing for fun will not need licensing either, and also pointing out that since it is what the Minister said on the Mike Harding Show last July then he will have no difficulty reassuring me that it is correct as written.

I reckon that this will be "Not what I meant" number 3 is coming up!!

Incidentally the DCMS automated reply says:

"Please note this is receiving attention. If your correspondance requires a response the DCMS aims to reply within 18 working days".

Dave