Form 696 - Anti music legislation

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: GUEST,foggers
Date: 03 Dec 08 - 02:21 PM

Done.
I could write a massive rant about civil rights and the long arm of bureacracy using the front of "crime/disorder/terror" to erode our rights to assembly and freedom of expression (which I have always interpreted as meaning musical and other cultural expressions of identity) . But I am knackered and need to go to bed.

Love the idea of a protest wassail though!

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: GUEST,Bob L
Date: 03 Dec 08 - 12:12 PM

Must see what our local singing copper has to say...

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: Mix O'Lydian
Date: 03 Dec 08 - 12:11 PM

There is now a discussion about this on thesession.org

http://www.thesession.org/discussions/display/19942

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: Folkiedave
Date: 03 Dec 08 - 11:44 AM

And please seem my post here......

thread.cfm?threadid=116679&messages=1

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Dec 08 - 11:28 AM

Hi there, Mudcat neighbours - we're up in arms about it over at The Session.org as well:
http://www.thesession.org/discussions/display/19942

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: GUEST, Sminky
Date: 03 Dec 08 - 08:08 AM

Done.

I suspect the form may be in breach of the Data Protection Act (excessive information), but I don't suppose that will cut much ice with the Met.

It's a disgrace.

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: GUEST,Hamish Birchall
Date: 03 Dec 08 - 07:51 AM

Despite being repeatedly asked by individuals and organisations (Musicians Union, Live Music Forum and others) over the past 5 years, neither the police nor the government have produced any evidence suggesting that live music results in significant crime and disorder.

Occasionally there is trouble at some gigs. But the police don't need Form 696 or the Licensing Act 2003 to prevent it. They have powers under separate legislation to intervene if they believe there is likely to be a breach of the peace at a venue.

It would be helpful to know how Form 696 is actually being implemented. But a more relevant question might be:

Why don't the Met and London Councils ask bars with big screens to provide the names, addresses and dates of birth of all punters who come to watch football?

In 2003, the police wrote to Tessa Jowell, then Secretary of State at the Department for Culture, recommending that televised sport in bars should be made a licensable entertainment because 'it attracts large crowds and quite frequently leads to disorder'.

The government rejected that recommendation.

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: GUEST,Howard Jones
Date: 03 Dec 08 - 05:20 AM

I can see why the police introduced this form. No one can deny that some music events do attract trouble, and it helps both the organisers and police to carry out a proper risk assessment. However it's pretty stupid of them to have so blatantly aimed it at black music or black audiences, and it's also pretty stupid to suggest that all licensable live music is a threat to law and order and requires this form to be completed.

I'm sure the police don't actually want to be inundated with thousands of forms covering events and genres of music which have run for years with no crime or trouble all. They must want to focus on those events where there is a serious risk of trouble.

As usual, the danger lies with bureaucracy overtaking common sense, and the risk that this will come to be applied indiscriminately. Of course, the other danger is that it will be applied too discriminately, based on the ethnicity of the performers and/or audience rather than actual risk.

The problem is, that the police's only experience of live music is those events which require a police presence - the vast majority of events which take place with no crime or trouble just don't register with them. From a copper's point of view, the connection "live music = trouble" reflects their experience. It doesn't reflect mine, and I suspect most people's, if you take the whole spectrum of music.

But is there any actual evidence of the form being used inappropriately, or of licensing authorities insisting on its use even for low-risk events?

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 03 Dec 08 - 04:26 AM

Love the idea of a strolling singing demo...

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 03 Dec 08 - 04:15 AM

Is it me or is government growing more "bass ackward" as time passes? This form falls on the heels of the issues that cropped up during last Knottinghill Carnival, am I right? That says something about the racist implications in it self.

As an American living in England, I have been quite surprised how little personal judgement policemen are permitted. When I first moved here I was gobsmacked by arrest of a woman for carrying a lethal weapon (her son's toy plastic sword) on the back seat of her car. Remember the fellow shot dead for carrying a table leg. Look at Jean Charles Menendez. This can't all be poor judgement, there is something wrong in the way the police are recruited and trained.

Not that things are much better in the US what with brutality and inappropriate racial targetting by police. I suppose there are and will always be pockets of mass stupidity with the power to make collosal mistakes. Bless the media for always letting us know.

So who is up for a music demonstration in London? Would be great if could be a kind of strolling wassailing force.

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: GUEST,Howard Jones
Date: 03 Dec 08 - 03:34 AM

I think there is a danger of a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to this. The form is a risk assessment, and it surely cannot be disputed that for some events a risk assessment of this nature is advisable.

However, there's no doubt that the form is very insensitively worded, which has provoked the accusations of racism. Some of the wording is also quite threatening, as it implies that failure to co-operate will result in the event being stopped. One of the policemen interviewed about this said something along the lines of "If you don't complete this form you're putting your venue at risk". But perhaps this is just the plod's traditional cackhandedness when it comes to PR.

There is also some confusion over where it is to be used. The police are saying it's only intended for large events, and that a pub putting on music for its regulars needn't bother. But the Met's definition of a "significant event" covers all licensable live music events, and the form also apparently covers private parties, which I thought were outside the Licensing Act.

I've only looked at a couple of boroughs' Licensing Policy Documents but in these ones using Form 696 is only a recommendation and is not mandatory, except in some cases for nightclubs and similar events.

What would be helpful is some evidence of how it is actually being applied. Is it just being used for large events? Is it being used mainly for events which are likely to attract certain ethnic groups? Is it being applied to all licensable live music events?

Nevertheless, I have signed the petition. Firstly, even if there has been an over-reaction, there is the danger that licensing authorities may come to see this as best practice, and in usual CYA fashion will apply it to all live music rather than have to make difficult and possibly contentious decisions over which events require it. Secondly, I resent the implication that any live music event is a threat to law and order. Thirdly, for the sorts of music that Mudcatters will be most involved with, it is impossible to comply with, since at most folk clubs and sessions you won't know in advacnce who will be performing.

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: pavane
Date: 03 Dec 08 - 02:35 AM

Signed

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: GUEST,Gweltas1
Date: 02 Dec 08 - 09:44 PM

Done

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: M.Ted
Date: 02 Dec 08 - 08:36 PM

Don,the rational, I believe, corresponds to our own "Patriot Act", (which now requires that I present identification to purchase certain "over-the-counter" cold medications). The idea being that certain types of performers attract certain types of people-

I am appalled, but not surprised by this.

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: Lanfranc
Date: 02 Dec 08 - 07:27 PM

Duly signed.

Don, this is nothing to do with the BNP. To my horror, even they would appear to be more moderate than the present UK Government and their agents in the Metropolitan Police (cf the present furore over the arrest of an MP who dared to obtain and release information embarrassing to our Scottish overlords (AKA "New Labour")).

Such a parcel of rogues in a nation....

Alan

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Dec 08 - 06:57 PM

I would sign it, save that, being American, my signature probably wouldn't be legal. What has me curious is this: What is the stated rational for this regulation? Does this have anything to do with the BNP, which I keep hearing so much about lately?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 02 Dec 08 - 03:19 PM

done here and Chris as well.

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: kerry and Mandy
Date: 02 Dec 08 - 12:59 PM

and us. all singed

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 02 Dec 08 - 12:53 PM

It is regrettable that this petition has (probably) sprung prematurely: I know one was under consideration from other sources. The main point for me is this. Consumer music (what Fergal Sharkey represents) can comply with the requirement for form 696. The names are booked in advance. What cannot comply is less formal music: the open mic, the singaround, the folk club where people join in on chorusses.

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: Sleepy Rosie
Date: 02 Dec 08 - 09:43 AM

How loathsome.

Is the potential power of the collective political singing voice (marching & protest songs?), being 'by the way' quietly silenced by this act?

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: TheSnail
Date: 02 Dec 08 - 09:21 AM

Signed.

See this previous thread - all singers are terror suspects.

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: muppitz
Date: 02 Dec 08 - 09:21 AM

Definitely in, as an event organiser I'd hate to have to provide such details, it may even push me into folding the club were it to stretch outside of London (Which it invariably would!).

muppitz
x

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: BB
Date: 02 Dec 08 - 09:16 AM

Some people seem to believe this isn't true, but further research dicovers an article in the Independent on 21st November, and the actual form on the Metropolitan Police site. I've tried to do links, but for some reason can't do so, so try doing what I did and google "form 696" (I didn't believe it at first either!)- you should find both.

Some people also say that the petitions do no good, as the option to sign them simply gives the government the excuse that they consult the people, so find any other way to harrass the government or Boris Johnson or your MP about it as well.

Incidentally, this isn't actually legislation as far as I can see - it's not in the Licencing Act - it looks far more as though it's the police taking the law into their own hands, which is really frightening considering what else has been happening recently!

Barbara

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: GUEST,Tom Bliss
Date: 02 Dec 08 - 09:08 AM

Me too.

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: Leadfingers
Date: 02 Dec 08 - 09:07 AM

Done !

Subject: RE: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: nickp
Date: 02 Dec 08 - 08:58 AM

done

Subject: Form 696 - Anti music legislation
From: Manitas_at_home
Date: 02 Dec 08 - 08:55 AM

Please sign the e-petition at the link below to protest against Form 696.



The 696 Form compels licensees who wish to hold live music events in 21 London Boroughs to report to the police the names, addresses, aliases and telephone numbers of performers, and most worryingly, the likely ethnicity of their audience. Failure to comply could result in fines or imprisonment. We believe this places unnecessary and frankly Orwellian powers in the hands of the Metropolitan Police, an institution which does not have the best record of racial fairness. The 696 form can only serve to deter the staging of live musical events - a positive form of activity in London and all cities - stifle free expression and quite possible penalise certain genres of music and ethnic audiences. It is an intrusion too far.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Scrapthe696/

Colin Callan

29 Clarkson House
6 Great Stanhope Street
Bath BA1 2BQ

Tel: [phone]