All UK folkies take note - the law!!!

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: Roger in Sheffield
Date: 09 Sep 01 - 09:26 AM

Gareth every time I tried to look at one of your links recently IE crashed, lets see if this one does

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Sep 01 - 12:16 PM

I just tried all the links and they all worked.

The latest Stage article, containing the council's defence of its policy, is a laugh. We must all be careful not to drop down dead in a pub without a PEL.

"I am not sure he has ever admitted if the legislation is open to interpretation, do we have any concrete evidence that it is, something he can't dispute

If Mr Grainger can dispute the Government Minister's answer to the specific question about 'members of the public as performers' given to The Lord Bishop of Oxford, in The House of Lords, I fail to see anything that he will not dispute.

The Lord Bishop of Oxford asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether, under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 1964, members of the public count as "performers" if they sing on licensed premises; and, if so, how local authorities can enforce public entertainment licensing legislation in a proportionate manner that is compatible with performers' rights under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord Bassam of Brighton): My Lords, Section 182 of the Licensing Act 1964 exempts licensed premises from the need to obtain a public entertainment licence where the entertainment provided consists of music and singing by not more than two performers. Whether members of the public who sing on licensed premises count as performers is a matter for the licensing authority to decide, depending on the circumstances. Ultimately, the compatibility of this provision with the European Convention on Human Rights would be a matter for the courts to determine. As part of our proposed general reform of the licensing and public entertainment laws in England and Wales, we propose to do away with the Section 182 provisions.

Roger

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: Roger in Sheffield
Date: 09 Sep 01 - 12:39 PM

Gareths links work fine for me in Netscape but not IE5.5
My IE program could be corrupted I suppose
Thanks Shambles but I see the answer being along the lines of - these are discussions in the house of Lords and not legislation....
Is it about time to open this up to larger media and write letters to the Guardian asking for the political parties to state their views on this obsurd legisation and its unforseen outcome?

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Sep 01 - 02:05 PM

Thanks Shambles but I see the answer being along the lines of - these are discussions in the house of Lords and not legislation.

Legislation must be discussed in the House of Lords before it become legislation.

The highly paid civil servants that prepared the brief for the Parimentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office Lord Bassam's answer on behalf of HM Government in the Lord's Entertainment debate, will I am sure be most impressed that their efforts are dismissed so lightly, by my Borough Council's employees.

I would not rate my chances of winning an argument with a Ministerial reply in The House of Lords. Mr Grainger and Mr Locke are welcome to try. If they wish to, perhaps we should just let them?

Who would you place your money on?

This is all nonsense anyway and WPBC know it. Public Entertainment Licensing is a Local Government Miscellanous Provision. By definition a provision for local goverment to decide.

The 'buck' has been passed with some eagerness to Mr Grainger and Mr Locke. Their attempts to pass it back again, may be understandable but futile.

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Sep 01 - 02:15 PM

RESOLVED:-

That the Committee confirms that the steps take by the Licensing Manager to encourage an application from the proprietor of the Cove House Inn, Portland for a licence permitting public entertainment on the premises were appropriate and justified.

That consultation take place with local musicians regarding the law as it stands at present and what amendments could usefully be made, and that these views be collated and passed to the Government.

The above summary of the minutes of the 5th June, make it clear that it was the councillors that insisted that some constructive measure was attempted....Little as it may be, it is not Mr Grainger's inititive at all........

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Sep 01 - 02:18 PM

The fact that The Local Cultural Strategy already exists for this consultation and the members seemed unaware of it, speaks volumes.

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: Gareth
Date: 09 Sep 01 - 06:15 PM

Never - Ever asumne that because there is a statutary duty your local Jobsworth's will understand 1/ That they have to do it ! or 2/. That they know how to do it !!

Gareth

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Sep 01 - 07:41 PM

This weekedn I was talking to someone at Walton Folk Festival, after singing my song about this. I was told that one place where they are coming doiwn hard on this is Thanet in Kent. I haven't got details, but it shouldn't be hard to find someone who can report what's happening there.

Then, local to us, there was the session of English Tunes in The Welsh Harp in Waltham Abbey, which had to close because of this.

So if people could came up with more examples like that, that'd be useful.

Also, of course, any examples where a District or Borough Council (it's not County Councils involved in this I understand)is willing to say that the reason they aren't interfering is because they have decided they don't see this as covered by the term "public entertainment", rather than just because, not being stupid, they turn a blind eye.

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Sep 01 - 01:05 PM

Feedback on The Stage articles will be welcomed

Letters Editor
The Stage Newspaper
47 Bermondsey Street
London
SE1 3XT

Or people can e-mail [e-mail]
or fax on 020 7357 9287

feedback would be great!

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Sep 01 - 03:08 PM

The comments on Gareths site containing the press coverage, are completely untrue. In the picture on the Guardian article, you cannot see my bells.........

I have not worn bells since the days of my 'hippie' youth.

Thanks Gareth for your hard work.

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: Gareth
Date: 10 Sep 01 - 07:16 PM

Rest assured Shambles, I will remove your balls, oops I mean bells.

Gareth

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Sep 01 - 02:20 AM

OUCH!

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Sep 01 - 02:22 AM

The council have already taken those.........

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Sep 01 - 02:29 AM

I am surprised to find the council are still sending out 'standard reply No 1'.

Which still says the pub is happy and it is only one musician who has complained.

How can they still send this to all who complain telling them this?

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: Gareth
Date: 12 Sep 01 - 06:26 PM

More press coverage - or at least updated !

CLICK HERE

Gareth

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: Gareth
Date: 12 Sep 01 - 06:31 PM

Sorry error Above, it was late and I am tired.

More Press Coverage

CLICK HERE

Gareth

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Oct 01 - 05:48 AM

Given all the problems presented to sessions and gigs by law and council authorities in England, The following is incredibly the way things are in Scotland....

(source: Donald McLeod, Licensing Solicitor, Aberdeen council):
The Licensing (Scotland) Act 1976 is mainly concerned with selling of liquor. If you've got a liquor licence you DON'T need a separate public entertainment licence for live music, unless the music is going to go on after drinking-up time. Renewing a Liquor Licence for a pub is only about £80 once every three years. Police, fire, building control, and environmental health departments are consulted on renewal.

In Aberdeen alone there are about 300 public houses, hotels and restaurants. A band could walk into any of these premises and play without any problem. The number of musicians is not an issue. The licensee does not have to do anything - he is not committing any offence, nor does he have to pay anything to the local authority.

Venues like nightclubs or theatres these are more closely regulated, usually requiring a Civic Public Entertainment Licence (Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982) which imposes additional public safety conditions.

The above was obtained by Hamish' Birchall, whose comments follow......

So here we have neighbouring EC jurisdictions one of which effectively limits musicians' employment to 5% of 111,000 potential venues, while in the other there is no such restriction. The difference could not be more stark. Note also the complete lack of any financial penalty for the provision of live music in these premises in Scotland.

I am quite sure that this extraordinary difference has legal implications. Scotland's live music laws are rational, and the country is actively implementing Article 27.1 of the Universal Declaration; but the equivalent law and enforcement in England/Wales is irrational (prevents live music where there are no noise or safety concerns), and actively opposes Article 27. The difference dates from about 1982 (there was a radical overhaul in Scottish licensing in 1976, but the full effects did not come into force until '82).

Subject: RE: All UK folkies take note - the law!!!
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Oct 01 - 06:03 AM

The latest from Mr Locke and the 'council's legal position'.
8th October 2001

THE COVE HOUSE INN, PORTLAND

The Chief Executive has asked me to respond to your e-mail dated 13th September 2001. At the same time I am taking this opportunity to restate the Authority's legal position as regards the requirement to hold a Licence to provide public entertainment as it applies to folk music sessions at the Cove House Inn, Portland.

Licensing of Public Entertainment

As you know the general rule that public entertainment cannot be provided without a Licence is contained in Schedule 1 Paragraph 1 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982.

For the purposes of the Act the term entertainment applies to 'public dancing or music or any other public entertainment of a like kind'

The Exemptions

The Act contains a number of exemptions which have no application to folk music sessions. More relevant however are the exemptions contained in Section 182 of the Licensing Act 1964 for public entertainment by way of music and singing only which is provided … 'by not more than two performers …'. The Licensing Act does not offer a definition of performer.

Folk musicians at the Cove House Inn have not claimed the Section 182 exemption since they acknowledge that more than two musicians have been involved in the music sessions in question.

It appears to me that the logical conclusion of your argument that folk musicians involved in jam sessions are not 'performers' is that the Section 182 exemption available for "not more than two performers" has no application to their music making which leaves us with the general rule that a Public Entertainment Licence is required.

Case Law

The legal principles that (I) a licence is required for public entertainment provided not only by paid performers but by individuals for their own amusement and (ii) that whether or not a charge is made for admission is immaterial were established in Clarke –v- Searle and Gregory –v- Tuffs (Tuss), respectively. Although both decisions considered statute which predates current legislation and on the facts dealt with public dancing I consider that they are of general application to public entertainment law, not just public dancing, and that they offer useful guidance for the folk music sessions in question.

The legal section has considered the case of Brearley –v- Morley to which, as I recall, you also made reference in your presentation to the Council's Social/Community Committee. The facts of this particular case were that a man was playing the piano in a public room in licensed premises as accompaniment for another man singing a song. A number of other men were sat around talking and listening. All were customers and received no remuneration for the entertainment. In this appeal case the Court found that the Licensee had not kept or used the room for public entertainment since piano playing or singing by customers was "for the purpose of solacing themselves with music".
Clarke –v- Searle does not appear to have been cited in the case which is unfortunate since the two decisions appear to conflict. Under current legislation on the same facts the S182 exemption would be available. Although I have not referred to Hansard it might be that the exemption was introduced under the Licensing Act with just such a situation of very small-scale music making in mind. The advice of the Licensing Section is that this 1899 case, although again useful guidance, is not of itself justification for changing our decision on the requirement to hold a Licence, a decision which has been reached weighing up a number of factors missing from this particular case.

The Council's Position

Where it comes to the attention of the Council that public entertainment is being provided without the benefit of a Public Entertainment Licence on anything more than a one off, accidental basis the Council will intervene to explain and if necessary to enforce licensing legislation. Having made extensive enquiries we have not identified any other Authority whose position differs from our own. In the context of activities at the Cove House Inn I consider that the action taken by this authority has been lawful, justified and proportionate. In the absence of a fresh judicial decision or a change in primary legislation this sets the Council's legal position on the point. I must make clear that I am unable to enter into any further discussion on the legal arguments and questions as to the Licence itself must now be a matter between the Council and the Licensee.

I would however be pleased to hear further from you with any evidence you have concerning the impact of the legislation on live music in the Borough so that any representations which may be appropriate can be made to the Local Government Association inviting modernisation of licensing laws.

Ian Locke
Director of Tourism and Corporate Services