The following from Hamish Birchall

Expanded section dealing with the cost of a Premises Licence application for live music:

http://www.musiciansunion.org.uk/articles/dcms_issues26.shtml.

"It will NOT cost anything extra for a pub to apply to provide entertainment as well when applying for permission to sell alcohol."
This refers specifically to the licence fee, and is only correct only if the application for permission to sell alcohol and to provide live music is made simultaneously. The statement ignores hidden compliance costs, which may be considerable (see below).

The Government's estimate of the one-off application fee for the new 'premises licence' is £100-500. In addition all licensed premises will pay a new 'annual inspections' fee which the Government says will be in the region of £50-150.

The Local Government Association is lobbying for much higher fees. Licensing lawyers say the Government estimates are 'pure fantasy' and must be higher. Many ordinary pubs are currently paying only £30 every three years for their liquor licence.

Premises currently paying high annual public entertainment licence (PEL) fees may save considerably, although it must be remembered that barely 5% of 110,000 premises hold annual PELs.

If the dual application for alcohol and live music is not made, an additional licence fee will be payable to host live music at any later date.

When the Bill becomes law in July (as the Government intends), if licensees do not make the dual application they will lose the right to host any regular gigs - even solo performance.

Licensees could, however, have up to 5 gigs a year using the temporary event notice scheme which the Government says will cost £20 a time (up to 499 people participating, max 72 hours duration).

Licensees who do not bother to apply for permission to provide live music can apply at a later date. This process is called 'Variation'. The Department for Culture says the variation fee could be in the region of £100-500.

Compliance costs: the DCMS '20 myths' statement does not mention the hidden compliance costs arising from local authority licence conditions when live music is chosen as an option.

Common licence conditions for live music include the provision of door supervisors, installation of new toilets, vestibules, fire-proofing cellars, rewiring, double glazing (even if the music is unamplified). The costs may run to many thousands of pounds.

Since big screen broadcasts and jukeboxes are not licensable entertainments, local authorities will not be able to impose any licence conditions specifically for these entertainments.

Jumping through all the hoops of additional local authority scrutiny, public consultation, and possible public hearings to deal with objectors, are some of the reasons why licensees may not bother to to apply for permission to continue any solo or duo performance they can currently provide using the 'two in a bar' exemption.

Another important reason will be the way in which the conversion to new licences is to be handled. Ordinary conversion applications (i.e. no live music) will be deemed granted if the local authority does not respond within two months of the application.

However, Variation applications, which must be made if any bar wishes to continue using the two-in-a-bar exemption to provide solo or duo gigs, will be deemed REFUSED if the local authority does not respond within two months.

Given the likely log jam of applications to convert to the new 'premises licence' when the Bill becomes law in July, it may be in licensees' interests to delay variation applications for a few months. Where that happens, any solo or duo performance in such premises will be illegal until the variation application is made, or unless the applicant lodges and wins an appeal to magistrates to overturn the refusal.

What does variation entail? It means starting the licensing process over again: notification of and approval by the police, fire service, environmental health, local residents, and finally the licensing committee of the local authority.

Why is this necessary for any live music, if crowds can jump up and down in these places in front of big screens and powerful PAs and that is not licensable? It all seems unnecessarily complex.

Why can we not have the more liberal regimes that operate successfully in Ireland, Scotland and elsewhere in Europe which allow some live music automatically in bars and restaurants?