The original campaign was to stop Local Authorities using PEL's as a "cash cow"

That was just one aspect of it, but by no means the only one. As I reported, within a few short miles of where I live, im two different counties, we had sessions which had been going well, for quite some years even, andn they were closed down because of the regulations. Nothing do with the locals authorities especially using PEL's as a cash cow.

In one case it was because another licensee had made a complaintb that more than two people at a time were playing in the bar of a rival establishment; in the other it was because the other conbditions laid down by the local authority for a PEL were excessive.

The main reason why Kim Howells came in for such stick was because he went on the Mike Harding show on Radio 2 and made a firm promise that there would be no question of a licence being needed for sessions "so long as money isn't changing hands" - and he then he then chose to disregard this in the legislation he shepherded through.

There are circumstances, such as war and peace, where it might be possible to seek excuse a politician for lying. But this wasn't one of them. If he'd lie over this, he'd lie over anything.

It won't be as bad as it would have been if the Government hadn't been forced to back down on a few things. But it would have been so very easy to have framed this legislation in a way which would have made things far better than they ever have been, and this was what we were entitled to expect. The only obstacle to this happening was an arrogant refusal to take advice, and to admit mistakes.