Mr. Caborn: >snip<

The Bill is a combination of safety law and licensing that keeps people safe at entertainment venues of any size. Taking away licensing would undermine fundamentally the ability to protect the public. So Parliament traditionally has taken the view that it is necessary for professionals such as health and safety officers and fire officers to advise licensing authorities on the adequacy of the arrangements in place at any venue.

Again this style of argument intentionally highlights the confusion brought about by combining alcohol and entertainment in one licence, as if the risks presentent were the same. To introduce new legislation by referring to the view that Parliament has traditionally taken - is sad. For new legislation gives Parliament the opportunity to see if the view requires updating or if the measures are still required.

It is like your child telling you that they cannot ride their bike without the stabilizing wheels on - and the moment when you point out that in fact the wheels have not been touching the ground for the last mile.   

Lords amendment No. 62A would totally undermine the ability of the experts to assess public safety across a huge swathe of entertainment venues. For example, Westminster city council has written to the Department to point out that 62 per cent. of its entertainment venues would escape any kind of scrutiny at all under amendment No. 62A. In our view, that is completely unacceptable. It would take public safety out of the hands of the experts and putting it in those of amateurs.

Again not subjecting all venues to blanket entertainment does not mean that the premises escape any kind of scrutiny at all or are unsafe without the out-dated concept of blanket entertainment licensing.

Westminster city council in their letter seem to have over-looked the fact and made no comment at all that this Bill has already exempted any form of entertainment from this scutiny! That which takes place in all of its places of public worship (churches). What makes this acceptable to them and to the Government, if it is unacceptable to them to exempt small events from the same requirement?

A good question for your MP?