Licensing consultation announced!

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 29 Oct 10 - 05:59 AM

There is a possibilty that the sort of treatment dished out to Mr Ahmed could have been avoided. I don't know enough about this particular case but this is the wider view.

It could have been that he simply did not accept that he required what he was told that he did. In such a situation there is no easy way forward. I have experience of this, for the Cove's (then) licensee did not accept that our session was a licensable Public Entertainment. Licensing employees do not like it when their word is questioned and any licensee brave enough to do this and stand their ground, is likely not to be on the top of the Licensing Dept's popularity list. And anyone else who may be forced to formally complain is not likely to receive any joy from a process that is slanted - to say the least. The focus is then firmly set on ways of dealing with the complainant - rather than ever on addressing the complaint.

This is very complicated legisltion but where there are means contained in and it could be argued, actually encouragment for residents to complain about premises - it is not so simple when the concern may be over specicific interpretations being used by licensing enployeees, especially those about what is or is not licensable.

There really needs to be a process built in where these differences can be taken to and decided by the elected council long before there are threats about possible prosecutions. Even then, the outcome is a 'post code lottery' but the situation where the law becomes in effect, what those who are paid to enforce it, say that is its, is a dangerous route leading only to a police state.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 29 Oct 10 - 05:13 AM

http://newsfeed.leedsvirtualnewsroom.co.uk/2010/10/restaurant-owner-handed-bill-for.html

"This conviction shows how important it is for businesses to have the right licences for their premises."

Leeds City Council entertainment licensing officers and West Yorkshire Police have visited the restaurant Barakas on four different occasions over the past two years, and on each occasion the premises was being used for unauthorised licensable activities such as the playing of recorded music, even with the prior warnings.

After the first inspection on 25 September 2008 the defendant attended council offices and obtained a premises licence application pack, but to date, an application for a premises licence authorising regulated entertainment has still not been made to the Council's Entertainment Licensing Section.

Mr Ahmed was cautioned by council officers on a second visit in August 2009 and advised that licensable activities cease until such time as a Premises Licence had been granted or Temporary Event Notice issued.

On 20th October 2009 officers from Entertainment Licensing visited the premises again to conduct a follow-up check. The provision of facilities for regulated entertainment was being provided without the benefit of a Premises Licence or Temporary Event Notice. The owner was verbally and physically obstructive towards a council licensing enforcement officer. He was cautioned and advised to cease all licensable activities until such time as a Premises Licence had been granted or Temporary Event Notice served.

John King comments:
Restaurant owner convicted for 'The provision of facilities for regulated entertainment was being provided without the benefit of a Premises Licence or Temporary Event Notice'

This makes a mockery of DCMS claims that it is possible t...o host entertainment without authorisation for provision of entertainment facilities.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 29 Oct 10 - 05:06 AM

http://se11actionteam.blogspot.com/2010/10/licensing-application-for-arch-145.html

John King comments:
Any premises applying for a live music licence in Lambeth is in for a fight. The local Labour Party has assembled an action team to co-ordinate objections.

Strangely, this is Kate Hoey's constituency. Kate Hoey was one of only two lab...our rebels who voted AGAINST the Licensing Act in Parliament, and has signed EDMs supporting exemptions for live music licensing.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Oct 10 - 05:01 AM

http://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/news/article-18382-talks-due-over-controversial-booze-licence-submitted-by-school/

John King Comments:
So-called 'controversial' licence application by a prep school faces 60 objections from moronic neighbours.

For a sample of the kind of music and dance event held at the school which is caught by the ...Licensing Act see: http://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/m/news/article-16794-video-st-piran-s-pupils-get-creative-for-arts-week/

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 29 Oct 10 - 04:49 AM

http://www.hart.gov.uk/licensing_hearing_minutes_11.10.10.pdf

John King comments:
Despite a 200-strong petition supporting the premises, Hart Council throw the book at the Bell Inn, Blackwater. A noise limiter, live music banned on Sundays (perversely recorded music is allowed), an acoustic lobby, external seating areas to be closed at 22:00.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 29 Oct 10 - 04:44 AM

http://princeofwales.wordpress.com/2010/10/20/the-future-of-moseley/

John King comments:
Sinister goings-on in Moseley.

The Prince of Wales reports: 'The Moseley Society will be leading the charge to stamp out live music, force pubs to close early and stop cafes and bars from offering what many folks moved to the village to enjoy.'

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 29 Oct 10 - 04:37 AM

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/newshome/Scout-hut-to-hold-parties.6601515.jp

John King comments:
The 1st Clanfield Scout Group apply for an entertainment licence (without alcohol). East Hampshire Council's licensing department do their best to obstruct it.

No outdoor music allowed after 8:00pm. Indoor events to finish by 10:00pm. Not because of 'noise fears' but because of 'parking concerns'.

'There has been a Scout hut here for 60 years.'

In a submission to East Hampshire's licensing sub-committee, resident Louise LePage said: 'One of the reasons we bought our house in our lovely lane is because of its rural and quiet location.

'We did not envisage having to live 30 yards from a site that hosts parties and discos, the music for, and the vibrations from, which we would hear and feel.

'I note that parking at the Scouts' new premises appears to be fairly limited. Where would visitors to a disco or a play performance park?'

After hearing the concerns, councillors decided that no events could be held outside after 8pm and any events inside the building must end by 10pm.

Scout leaders said the hut will not be available for hire for parties between the ages of 12 and 24.

Jo Barden-Hernandez, head of legal services in East Hampshire, said: 'The committee took on board the objectors' comments and as a result reduced the time activities can be carried out outside the scout hut to 8pm and the time activities can be carried out inside to 10pm, which the committee felt was reasonable.'

Alan Burton, scout group chairman, said the vast majority of events would be children's birthday parties.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 29 Oct 10 - 04:26 AM

http://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/news/8476423.Supervisor_axed_for_playing_loud_music/

John King comments:
A pub supervisor is fired after residents complain about music. In addition, Warrington Council punish the premises and future licensees by imposing a noise limiter and changing the licence so that music finishes at 11pm instead of 12.

Any live music, including non-amplified folk sessions which are very unlikely to cause any noise concern are also being limited and prevented. This is the danger when in practice the only real way any music can take place is as licensable Regulated Entertainment.

As there is no legal way to licence excessive noise - the use of permissions under the Lcensing Act to deal with noise is a complete nonsense but is still the reason why many would be concerned when there are any moves to address the effect this has on the health of all live music.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 29 Oct 10 - 04:06 AM

http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news.ma/article/88746?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ma-rss-all-n

Councils call for licence fee powers* By John Harrington 28/10/2010 11:58

Councils have asked the Government for the right to set their own alcohol licence fees to plug shortfalls in their funding.

Morning Advertiser legal editor Peter Coulson said: "I think there's a danger ahead for the licensed trade, which could face quite large licence fee increases, particularly in urban areas."

Coulson feared a return to the kind of high fees charged for Public Entertainment Licences (PELs) before they were scrapped.

It seems to be overlooked but there is of course no longer an 'alcohol' licence. Any increase in the fees for Premises Licenses will only further limit live music and affect all the other non-alcohol activities that currently require this licence.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 27 Oct 10 - 05:33 AM

http://www.culture.gov.uk/news/news_stories/7519.aspx

Ask Ed Vaizey part one
27 October 2010

Ed Vaizey's answers to your questions.

Over the past fortnight, members of the public have been invited to send Ed Vaizey their questions. We have received more than 30 questions, most of which were about arts and culture. The most popular subject was the Crosby Garrett helmet, and a number of people asked about a review of the Treasure Act.

We have tried to cover a broad range of questions and include as many different topics as possible, although some questions were hard to include as they were very long. We hope to answer some of the shorter questions that were not included this time in future editions.

Thanks to everyone who sent in questions.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 27 Oct 10 - 05:17 AM

http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?sectioncode=7&storycode=68257&c=1

Government still stalling on plans for live music

27 October, 2010

By James Wilmore

Coalition promises announcement on pub gigs will come in 'due course' in repsonse to petition

The government has responded to a 17,000 signature-strong petition calling for licence exemptions on live music – but still refused to reveal its plans to tackle the issue.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 26 Oct 10 - 05:10 PM

http://www.m-magazine.co.uk/?p=4457

Throughout October and November, visitors to a selection of Sue Ryder's charity shops nationwide will be entertained by Chris Ford, during a series of live music performances. Chris, who cites his musical influences as including Bruce Springsteen and Nick Drake, will use one of Sue Ryder's signature guitars during his tour.

The free-to-attend gigs are taking place to encourage people to visit Sue Ryder's shops, as well as raise awareness of how money raised in its shops is vital to support the charity provide end of life and long term care to thousands of people each year.

This from the PRS magazine. It is no doubt a good way to ensure that all these shops obtain PRS licences but I wonder if anyone has obtained Entertainment Permission. From the photo, the performance appears to be amplified and as a named performer is being advertised (according to the latest guidance document) it cannot qualify as exempt under the incidental exemption.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 26 Oct 10 - 09:06 AM

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/newshome/Bar-owner39s-joy-as-it.6598764.jp

One way to thwart the plans of neighbours who move next to a pub and complain is to move the pub. This will also confuse licensing officers. Seems to have worked - so far.

Despite closing down after losing its music licence a wine bar and restaurant has reopened.

Number 69 Restaurant in Castle Road, Southsea, closed down after neighbours complained of noise levels.

It had its licence revoked and was given a noise abatement notice by the city council's environmental health.

But the bar has reopened in Palmerston Road, Southsea

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 26 Oct 10 - 08:55 AM

http://www.whitbygazette.co.uk/news/local/gothic_weekend_bar_licence_appeal_cancelled_1_2618928

John King Comments: A triumph for lazy policing. Music at Goth weekend banned.
"We have one night of complaints and we are not able to run one now. There are certain residents that had no problems with it and stated that to us as well."

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 26 Oct 10 - 04:05 AM

http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?sectioncode=7&storycode=68248&c=1

Lib Dem MP Greg Mulholland, chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Save the Pub Group and Kate Nicholls, head of communications at the ALMR, are to put their case to the Home Office later today.

They will meet with Home Office minister James Brokenshire, who is responsbile for overseeing the controversial changes, due to be in place by November 2011.

The changes include giving more power to licensing authorities over decisions, allowing councils to charge a late-night levy and increasing licence fees.

Can't think of anything less likely to encourage live music than to introduce an increase in the required licensing permission. Of course, the intention of the Home Office is a knee-jerk reaction to address alcohol concerns (mainly for Daily Mail readers) but as we no longer have an alcohol only licence - any increase will also affect all the non-alcohol related activities that now require Premises Licenses. A point that if the Colaition Govt have noticed, it is a point that they seem determined to try to ignore.

Sadly the increase in fees shows that it is the LGA Group lobby that is really still in control.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 25 Oct 10 - 01:36 PM

http://www.hmg.gov.uk/epetition-responses/petition-view.aspx?epref=livemusicevents

Government respond to the live music petition:

'Currently the Coalition Government is reviewing the situation concerning live music performance at smaller venues, and the Minister for Tourism and Heritage, John Penrose MP, is considering the result of the Consultation on Live Music which closed in March. The Coalition is committed to cutting Red Tape, to encourage live music and is keen to find the best way forward. A number of options are being considered and the Minister will make an announcement in due course.'

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 25 Oct 10 - 11:14 AM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/24/gaza-theme-park-attack-arson

John King comments:
Here's how Hamas go about live music licensing in Gaza:

'First he was told he must apply for a permit to hold live music evenings. Then he had to sign a pledge that such parties would be within unspecified "morals and traditions". Finally, last mont...h his restaurant was raided during a party.'

Sounds extreme? All of the above happens right here right now...

In the UK all music in restaurants is licensed. In some cases, music has been completely banned as a result of ONE resident raising a purely speculative objection. In may other cases live music in restaurants may face restrictions such as a ban on amplification, a noise limiter, a restriction on the genre of music to be played, retrictions on the number of musicians or types of instruments played, a restriction on the number of singers, the days of the week they can perform, the number of times they can perform, the hours they can work, a ban on dancing, a restriction on under-18s attending etc

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 23 Oct 10 - 12:27 PM

http://www.hounslow.gov.uk/licensing_duke_of_york-2.pdf

John King comments:
The Duke of York in Hounslow is given permission for live music - restricted to Fridays and Saturdays only between 8:00 and 11:30.

Note that that applicant's solicitors appear to have failed to tick all the boxes necessary for live music and provision of entertainment facilities...

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 23 Oct 10 - 12:19 PM

http://www.babergh.gov.uk/Babergh/Home/Council+and+Democracy/Council+and+Committee+Papers/Licensing+Sub-Committee/Minutes+-+1+Oc

John King Comments:
Live music at Sudbury Hockey Club? Sorry that's only allowed on two occasions between Sepember and April to appease terrified residents.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 23 Oct 10 - 12:16 PM

http://www.thisiskent.co.uk/news/Bleak-House/article-2785927-detail/article.html

John King comments:
Bleak House gets a live music licence - with restrictions of course.

One of the neighbours who described live music as a 'nightmare for residents' has just started building his home next to Bleak House.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 19 Oct 10 - 12:27 PM

http://www.thestar.co.uk/headlines/West-Street-dubbed-neighbourhood-from.6587837.jp

John King comments:
What has all this urinating and fighting got to do with live music?

Nothing of course, but invariably local authorities allow extended opening hours with permission for recorded music while banning live music.
...
So a DJ is allowed where an unamplified piano is illegal.

The application itself already limits the entertainment. The licensee could and should be able to decide for themselves, the time that various activities cease, there is no need to have entertainment ending a full hour before closing time as a licensing condition.

But again and again we see one licensable activity (live music) being limited and used in order to enable another (serving alcohol).

The activity which is being limited, is the one with many benefits and the one being encouraged, is the one presenting the problems. How did this crazy situation happen?

The Licensing Act 2003 list all the licensable activies - it does not require Licensing Authorities to limit and use one to enable another. As the Act does not state which licensable activity should take priority over another - the reasonable assumption is that they should be treated equally.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Oct 10 - 03:53 AM

http://www.lga.gov.uk/lga/aio/12673160

14.50 – 16.00 Workshops
Places will be allocated on first-come, first-served basis according to room capacity.
Refreshments available at the back of each syndicate room.
W1. Music to your ears
Horace Trubridge, Assistant General Secretary, Musicians Union
Lesley Cameron, Principal Licensing Officer, St Albans Council - tbc
Cllr Chris White, Chair, Culture, Tourism and Sport Board, LGA

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Oct 10 - 03:48 AM

http://www.lga.gov.uk/lga/aio/14338512

John King comments:
The LGA's Licensing and Localism Conference is Wed 20th Oct. Taking part in the panel discussion are Susan Holden - Entertainment Licensing Section, Leeds Council (see below) and head of the Met Police Form 696 Unit.

The "Music to your Ears?" workshop promoting the virtues of the "...incidental music" licensing exemption appears to have been cancelled. http://www.lga.gov.uk/lga/aio/12673160

Intriguingly, no representatives from DCMS are now attending this conference.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 19 Oct 10 - 03:45 AM

http://democracy.leeds.gov.uk/Published/C00000430/M00004597/$$$Minutes.doc.pdf

John King comments:
Leeds Council ban live jazz in Cafe Jazz & Restaurant. Recorded jazz is allowed.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 18 Oct 10 - 04:21 PM

As previously stated many times in this thread, "There is ample legislation to deal with noise rather than through refusal of an application"

It is less a case here of cutting red-tape as it is of finally burying a very troublesome red herring.

The use of the Licensing Act 2003 to deal with a potential noise concern is clumsy and totally unsatisfactory. It is counter-productive as it conflicts with a local authority's other responsibilities. Many non-amplified cultural activities are being prevented or limited under this process, when these show little or no prospect of providing any form of noise concern. This practice must cease and it places where it has been used for this purpose, these should be reviewed and overturned.

Many people are still being encouraged to accept that without the additional entertainment licensing permission in the Licensing Act 2003, the public would be left unprotected from the effective method of dealing with excessive noise concerns. This is the myth which is, if is not encouraged, is seldom corrected by those who are fully aware of the true situation.

In cases where permission is limited or refused for Regulated Entertainment on grounds of potential noise, this process does not of course provide any protection for residents, from any actual or potential general noise.

It is obvious that this process cannot deal with noise concerns as is limited to only noise emanating from that which qualifies as Regulated Entertainment under the Licensing Act 2003.

More importantly, as it is limited only to noise emanating from Regulated Entertainment, this process cannot in fact provide any protection from any actual noise concern emanating from any music (live or recorded) which either does not qualify in the first place as Regulated Entertainment or which is specifically excluded by any of the Act's many exemptions.

These activities cannot be limited or prevented in advance by the Licensing Act 2003.

So any noise concern that may emanate from activities which either does not qualify in the first place as Regulated Entertainment or which is specifically excluded by any of the Act's many exemptions can only be dealt with by other legislation.

This legislation protects the public from all general noise concerns. It is most effective in protecting the public from noise concerns emanating from all music (live or recorded) as it applies equally to premises where permission under Licensing Act 2003 is in place (for Regulated Entertainment) and where it is not.

Any noise concern emanating from premises with entertainment permission will still always be subject to other legislation.

Which really begs the question of why the additional entertainment licensing under the Licensing Act 2003 is being so defended on grounds of noise, by the LGA Group lobby. It is a very expensive process but it is now mostly duplication of measures available under Planning, Environmental and other legislation.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 17 Oct 10 - 03:53 PM

A licensing authority must carry out its functions under this Act ("licensing functions") with a view to promoting the licensing objectives AND must also have regard to—
(a)its licensing statement published under section 5, and

(b)any guidance issued by the Secretary of State under section 182.

When a council chooses to use different word in its SOLP to those in the S182 Guidance how can it 'have regard' to them both? Especially when they seem to see this as secondary to promoting the licensing objectives.....

The words of the Act:
4General duties of licensing authorities E+W

(1)A licensing authority must carry out its functions under this Act ("licensing functions") with a view to promoting the licensing objectives.

(2)The licensing objectives are—

(a)the prevention of crime and disorder;

(b)public safety;

(c)the prevention of public nuisance; and

(d)the protection of children from harm.

(3)In carrying out its licensing functions, a licensing authority must also have regard to—

(a)its licensing statement published under section 5, and

(b)any guidance issued by the Secretary of State under section 182.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 17 Oct 10 - 03:15 PM

I've told you before and I'll tell you again the "Guidance" does not make law and does not overide the words in the Act.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 17 Oct 10 - 01:33 PM

The S182 Statutory Guidance to the Licensing Act 2003:

13.58 Care will be needed to ensure that only necessary, proportionate and reasonable licensing conditions impose any restrictions on these events. Where there is any indication that events are being deterred by licensing requirements, statements of licensing policy should be re-visited with a view to investigating how the situation might be reversed. Broader cultural activities and entertainment may also be affected. In developing their statements of licensing policy, licensing authorities should also consider any views of the local authority's arts committee, where one exists.

There a difference between the words -
statements of licensing policy should be re-visited with a view to investigating how the situation might be reversed.

And the words that this council have chosen to use in their SOLP -

the policy may be reviewed with a view to investigating how the situation may be remedied.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: Dennis the Elder
Date: 17 Oct 10 - 07:32 AM

"The Chairman then allowed questions to be put to the applicant by the Sub-Committee. Members queried the measures the applicant had in place for measuring noise, and the applicant's representative confirmed that there was a limiter in place on their internal sound system. They would also be happy to work with the Environmental Health Department in measuring the noise levels and making sure they did not exceed acceptable levels, they also offered to employ SIA accredited door staff when live music is provided and to have secondary, internal doors fitted to prevent noise breakout when people are entering or leaving the premises."

The above sounds very reasonable and it would be interesting to know if the Environmental Health Department had been asked for their comments on the application. There seems to be no reference made to them by the committee.
As an Environmental Health Officer with responsibilities for noise pollution working for a small Local Authority I find this disturbing. The above quote is exactly what we are looking for when assessing a possible noise problem.
If the precautions outlined above were instigated, then the major problem would be persons leaving the Grill not the music.
As previously stated many times in this thread, "There is ample legislation to deal with noise rather than through refusal of an application"

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 17 Oct 10 - 06:18 AM

http://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/pdf/Licensing%20Policy%202008.pdf

The following is from Southlakeland Council's Statement of Licensing Policy:

2.5 The Authority is keen to promote the artistic and cultural life of the District and licensing will be approached with a view to encouraging cultural activities and innovative forms of public entertainment for the wider cultural benefits of communities generally.
Only conditions strictly necessary for the promotion of the licensing objectives will be attached to a licence for activities of this nature, as the Authority is aware of the need
to avoid imposing substantial indirect costs. Where there is any indication that licensing requirements are deterring such events, the policy may be reviewed with a view to investigating how the situation may be remedied.

As the Council must follow their own policy - perhaps a locally resident musician can ask for such a review?

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 17 Oct 10 - 05:58 AM

http://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/CIS/PDF/10-09-17%20Licensing%20Sub-Committee%20Minutes.pdf

The follow comments from John King:
Bored with imposing live music restrictions on primary schools, licensing chiefs at Southlakeland District Council ban music in a restaurant.

'The Sub-Committee was concerned that the provision of live music and late night refreshments would be likely to have a seriously adverse effect on the quality of life for local residents in this predominantly residential area.'

Again - alcohol is OK but live music (even non-amplified) is not. A late night curry is likely to have a seriously adverse effect of the quality of life for local residents (who live across the river).

The following from the document:

The prevention of public nuisance is a licensing objective. Noise disturbance can be a public nuisance. The authority is required to promote the licensing objectives. Granting a licence in circumstances where nuisance is likely to be caused will undermine that objective. The Council recognises that noise from licensed premises can cause great disturbance to people living and working near these premises if not properly managed or controlled.

Not sure that I follow the tenuous logic here to deny any form of live music in advance, because it might be likely to cause a nuisance. It is just a likely that it may not be likely to cause a nuisance and local authorities are required to promote many other objectives.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 17 Oct 10 - 02:13 AM

http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/local/8456267.A_song_and_dance_to_save_music_pub/

A song and dance to save music pub
www.worcesternews.co.uk
SUPPORTERS have rallied around a Malvern pub amid fears its sale will spell the end of a vital hub for live music.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 16 Oct 10 - 02:17 AM

Cllr Bateman said to the protestors: "It seems strange you buy a place next to a pub with a garden and you don't seem to like laughter and loud talking."

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 15 Oct 10 - 01:30 PM

http://www.ccskills.org.uk/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=AdJZCyRdP2A%3D&tabid=81

A number of quangos seem to have left us but the Creative and Cultural Skills Council lives to fight another day.

The following from John King:
The Creative and Cultural Skills Council have published another absolutely hopeless analysis of the performing arts sector. If you have spent £29.99 on this 'report' I suggest you ask for your money back. If you have been financing this quango out of your taxes, write to the Secretary of State for Culture Media and Sport.

The live music employment statistics are still two years out of date (as confirmed in Parliament by questions from Lords Colwyn and Clement-Jones).

Apparently there are 28,545 actors, singers, musicians and other entertainers in the UK in 2008/9. This figure includes part-time workers. A ridiculously low number, as this definition potentially includes all professional and amateur entertainment in the UK (including schools).

A note on p17 claims: 'as well as these, significant numbers work in the area of live music performance:
42,480 in 2006/07, rising to 50,776 in 2008/09 (an increase of 20%).
Creative & Cultural Skills. (2008).
Performing Arts: Impact and Footprint 2008/09. Creative & Cultural Skills.'

Even if either of these figures are accurate, 50,776 cannot be in ADDITION to the 28,545.

Pretty obvious mistakes - but enough to fool DCMS 'statisticians' who have been relying on the accuracy of these 'statistics'.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 15 Oct 10 - 06:29 AM

http://www.nailseapeople.co.uk/news/Nailsea-pub-open-late-play-live-music-despite/story-10100630-detail/story.html

A Nailsea pub can open late at night and play live music despite protests from neighbours, North Somerset Council licensing sub-committee ruled this week.

The couple told the sub-committee they were 'shocked' at the level of protests as none of the neighbours had approached them with any complaints.

Mr Jacobs said he was a member of Pubwatch and he had ensured his four-strong bar staff were well-trained.

The pub was given permission to open Monday to Thursdays 10am to midnight; Friday and Saturday 10am to 12.30am; Sunday 10am to 10.30pm with 30 minutes 'drinking up' time.

Live music could be played from 10am-11pm daily.

Mr Jacobs said he had no intention of opening for those hours but wanted the option for 'occasional' functions.

The sub-committee imposed certain conditions which included regular 'noise' checks, no glasses in the car park and doors not to be left open.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 14 Oct 10 - 06:22 AM

http://www.culture.gov.uk/news/news_stories/7484.aspx

DCMS cuts quangos.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 14 Oct 10 - 02:57 AM

http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?sectioncode=7&storycode=68168&c=1

Mass support for pub over clash with Travelodge
14 October, 2010
By James Wilmore
Popular Staffordshire music pub faces threat of licence review over noise complaints

Nearly 3,000 people have thrown their support behind a popular music pub threatened with a licence review after noise complaints from a newly-opened Travelodge hotel.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Oct 10 - 08:29 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/oct/13/menzies-cambell-joins-lib-dem-revolt-tuition-fees?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_med

In a letter to all Lib Dem MPs, Nick Clegg yesterday stressed that no decision had yet been taken but suggested he was likely to break the election pledge. He called it "one of the most difficult political decisions I have ever had to make".

As Mr Clegg is to renage on this pledge - what hope is there of him honouring his pre-election support for the 200 exemption?

http://www.thestage.co.uk/features/feature.php/28030/cultivating-culture

We'll also end the bureaucratic nightmares that hold performers back, like Labour's live music licensing system, for example. It has become a complicated, time-consuming regime which has even caught schools, hospitals and colleges in its tentacles, and is stifling the kind of small-scale live music that is so important for the future.

So we'll exempt small venues with capacities of less than 200 and go back to the rule where any venue can put on a performance of un-amplified music by one or two people without a licence. That is how we can foster new talent and new community venues. And Liberal Democrats recognise how extraordinarily competitive careers in performance and the arts can be, and how many of the people working in them are struggling.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 13 Oct 10 - 04:26 PM

http://www2.canterbury.gov.uk/committee/mgConvert2Pdf.aspx?ID=5783&T=9

John King comments:
ONE complaining neighbour and the Maiden's Head in Canterbury faces a premises licence review.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 12 Oct 10 - 02:34 PM

So applications for dance, live music, indoor sporting events, to be thrown out in their entirety but once again alcohol is seemingly not thought to be too much of a problem for our Lib Dem Councillor. There is something badly wrong here.

John King comments:
Latest stats show that the Licensing Act has led to TWO premises losing their licence for selling alcohol to under-18s.

Contrast that with the ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY FIVE THOUSAND, FIVE HUNDRED licensed premises which can now ...no longer stage even the smallest live music performance.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 12 Oct 10 - 10:43 AM

http://junctionward.mycouncillor.org.uk/2010/07/11/response-to-licensing-application-gilak-restaurant-holloway-rd/

The following comments from John King:
Live music in a small family restaurant? No chance. Not if the Liberal Democrat Ward Councillor is an idiot.

Cllr Arthur Graves: 'Can I suggest that before any licence is granted, the premises have to adhere to a sound test by the local authorities environmental health team and that the premises have to install any soundproofing equipment as required by that test? Can I also suggest that the applications for dance, live music, indoor sporting events, etc as set out above, are thrown out in their entirety?

I am all for new businesses coming to the Archway area that set out to be of benefit to our community and look to help improve the local amenity for all but I am vehemently against allowing the setting up of potentially dangerous and at the very least noisily disruptive new premises.'

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 12 Oct 10 - 04:32 AM

Not only is additional entertainment permission still unable to deal with noise concerns, historically this requirement has actually made the situation worse and has led directly to the present situation.

You could never obtain licensing permission to enable you to make noise. However, in practice that was exactly what happened when premises paid the local authority for the old PEL. As some LAs received considerable income from the fees, the LA had a vested interest in finding ways to allow any permitted entertainment, even where it was clear that it was constituting a real noise concern. Thus the approach to complaints was different to the one we see now.

One of the sensible intentions of The Licensing Act 2003 was to do away with local authorities being able to set the level of their own fees but without the vested interest involved in enabling live music - it is difficult to see how live music can survive in our pubs (even non-amplified music).

As we can see from the reports in this thread, if it survives through the Planning and Licensing stages it will fall foul of the Environmental Protection legislation. All these processes are encouraging complaints which the local authority members (as advised by their employees) seem to think they are duty bound to address. Even when, as in the following example, there is one complaint compared to six in favour!

Lydia and Steven also refute claims by Mrs Ashley to be acting on behalf of other residents and will provide the committee with a petition from six nearby residents in favour of the changes.

Council officials say there have been no other objections to the changes but the committee must decide the issue since they have been unable to "negotiate away" the comments raised by Mrs Ashley.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 11 Oct 10 - 01:26 PM

http://www.wisbechstandard.co.uk/news/chairman_apologises_after_meeting_adjourned_in_pub_dispute_over_opening_a_beer_garden_1_66

One moaning neighbour strikes again.

However Lydia Payne and Steven Jevon who run the pub have refuted the allegations and said that when police had been called to the pub following complaints by Mrs. Ashley "they have found nothing to warrant a call out".

The licensees want the outside of the pub to be included in their license so they can open a beer garden and a smoking area.

Lydia and Steven also refute claims by Mrs Ashley to be acting on behalf of other residents and will provide the committee with a petition from six nearby residents in favour of the changes.

Council officials say there have been no other objections to the changes but the committee must decide the issue since they have been unable to "negotiate away" the comments raised by Mrs Ashley.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 11 Oct 10 - 01:13 PM

http://southharrow.harrowobserver.co.uk/2010/09/south-harrow-pub-the-half-moon.html

The three member licensing panel met on Tuesday September 21 at Harrow Civic Centre, Station Road, Harrow, and decided to add a condition to the venue's licence requiring the owners to install a noise limiter and ordered that live music stop daily at 9.30pm until the equipment is in place.
Mrs Clifford-Varley said afterwards: "I welcome the decision and I'm very grateful to the environmental health team and the panel for the decision they made.
"Hopefully it will bring to an end the noise disturbance to our lives."

XXX PUB COMMENT XXX
Tracey Kelly, joint leaseholder of The Half Moon, said: "The main cause was one particular resident that complained. We went round all the houses all round the pub and not one other person had a problem.
"We're happy with the result [of the review] because we're complying with it totally and we're spending the best part of £30,000 sound-proofing the doors, lobby and windows - a total refurbishment in and out. It's being carried out immediately.
"We have live music from Wednesday to Sunday and I'd like to thank all our customers and residents for all their support."

A Harrow Council spokeswoman said there will have been four licence reviews sparked by environmental health officers although they are not part of a concerted crackdown but rather the result of complaints of noise nuisance being more frequent in the summer and there then being a time lag in processing them.

Besides The Half Moon, two other premises have already had their licences reviewed - The Life of Reilly in Warwick Parade in Belmont Circle and ISHQ in High Road, Harrow Weald - while another review application is in process for The West Bar in Northolt Road, South Harrow.

The same old story. Sympathy is of course due to anyone who is subject to actual noise concerns. However, possibly some sympathy is also due to those who have already applied and paid for entertainment permission and who may reasonably assume that this process would have enabled them to provide it.

These council employees have already met and given licensing permission for these premises. As part of this process, they would have taken into account any representations from interested parties as well as residents complaints. These representations would at that time have included the same environmental health officers who are now reviewing the licenses. It also is likely that the complaints which are said to have instigated these reviews would no doubt have been made at that time.

As protecting the public from noise is always stated by those who promote it, to be its object - the question must be, what is the point of the expensive process of additional entertainment permission required under the Licensing Act 2003?

For whether this permission was in place or not (and for any exempt form of live music) - any noise emanting from the permitted activity is obviously still subject to effective noise abatement processes under the Environmental Protection Act.

With the Enviornmental Protection Act and Planning Legislation - the additional entertainment licensing required for these type of premises under the Licensing Act 2003, is expensive duplication and could be scrapped without any effect on the public. The idea that it has any effect on dealing with noise is plainly absurd.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 11 Oct 10 - 12:29 PM

http://www.musicweek.com/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=1042861&c=1

John King comments:
'Live music campaigners and lawyers are calling on the Government to clarify live music licensing rules after dismissing recently released figures from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport as "fundamentally flawed".'

Two major problems for the ...latest DCMS live music 'statistics'.

They failed to take account of premises which do not have licensed facilities for provision of 'facilities for making music'. Without this secondary authorisation most performances of live music would probably be illegal.

And, as usual, the 'statistics' include schools, hospitals, public spaces etc.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 11 Oct 10 - 05:28 AM

http://www.culture.gov.uk/news/news_stories/7476.aspx

Ask Ed Vaizey
www.culture.gov.uk
When Ed Vaizey became Minister for Culture, Communications and Creative Industries, he made clear his wish to maintain a level of direct contact with many of the people who want to get in touch with him to ask questions, raise issues or make comments and suggestions

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 10 Oct 10 - 08:40 AM

http://www.warwickcourier.co.uk/news/local/intolerable_noise_scuppers_art_bar_s_bid_to_extend_opening_hours_1_1506925

John King Comments:
Music and dance in an art gallery/wine bar?

'One tearful resident said that she had not spent a weekend at her home since Christmas due to the noise.' Allegedly.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 08 Oct 10 - 11:56 AM

The Rose & Crown, Warminster applies for extended hours, but ends up with a noise limiter and other live music restrictions...

http://www.warminster-web.co.uk/warminster_news.htm

There is a pattern appearing here. The lesson is that if you are currently lucky enough to be reasonably free of restrictions, don't apply for anything else (and pay for the process) as the Licensing Authority will take this opportunity to further limit what they have already granted.

Not exactly what the application for a variation was intended for.

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 08 Oct 10 - 06:21 AM

See also this thread on the Travelodge complaint:
thread.cfm?threadid=132613&messages=16

Subject: RE: Licensing consultation announced!
From: GUEST,The Shambles
Date: 07 Oct 10 - 01:50 PM

17:36 | Tuesday July 28, 2009

By Robert Ashton

Culture select committee chairman John Whittingdale has criticised the Government for its "utterly pathetic and hopeless" response to his Licensing recommendations.

Whittingdale had set out 26 recommendations in May, but earlier this month the Government overruled most of the key suggestions including the introduction of a licence exemption for smaller venues and to scrap the controversial Form 696.

So it is not just the Lib Dems who have renaged. Now that Mr Whittingdale's Party is the Government - his Committee's recomendations to scrap Form 696 are still thought to be of no value.

I don't suppose that he will be describing this Govt's response on Form 696 as "utterly pathetic and hopeless" but I will.