I've just read Richard Caborns letter to the JCHR above, and it reminds me of an issue that hasn't been discussed much in any of the online PEL discussions I've seen.

Many informal sessions have been taking place in unlicenced pubs. They have been technically illegal but typically the landlord has turned a blind eye (or should it be a deaf ear) because in reality what was going on was totally harmless, and common sense prevailed.

It's easy for Cabon to argue that the new bill is deregulatory because the last minute amendments applied exemptions (of a vague sort) to activities which technically should have been licensed already: "what the Bill requires to be licensed in any event already requires a licence under current law."

Of course, we could respond to this by continuing to break the law. The only problem is that the penalities are much higher now, the whole affair has been widely publicised and the council jobsworths are on the warpath.

Anahata