PEL - Idea

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 16 Dec 02 - 02:00 PM

http://www.modal.co.uk/

The proposals for the new licensing legislation will result in the curbing of live music in public places. Whatever music you play, promote or enjoy, legislation contained in the new licensing bill will put it severely at risk
Add your voice to those opposing the legislation by attending the public meeting
When? 1pm, 6 January 2003
Where? Union Chapel, Compton Terrace, Islington, London N1 (Nearest Tube: Highbury & Islington)
Speakers to be announced
For further info contact:
[e-mail]

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Dec 02 - 02:07 PM

The following from Dick Gaughan, which he has agreed to be circulated (or regurgitated).

I will travel anywhere and take part in any effort to publicly break this law should it be passed. I am prepared to take the full consequences of doing so, including being arrested and imprisoned should that prove necessary. I don't just sing about this stuff, I try to live it and I don't sing or say what I'm not prepared to do in practise.

You organise the event and I'll be there (allowing for things like actually being in the country at the time, obviously.)

I will not, however, give my support in any way to any campaign to create exemptions within this law for any group or subgroup which will leave other groups and subgroups abandoned to it. That would be anathema to everything I've spent my life fighting for.
DG

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Nov 02 - 03:11 PM

Tessa Jowell handed the question over to Kim Howells to answer. He said, 'Well, I got into a bit of trouble for my remarks about folk singers.' 'Oh, I know,' I said. People laughed. He then said something about having to consider individual cases. He said he had recently been in a pub, having a quiet drink when a musician had come in with two amplifiers and had started blasting away. Obviously there were no safety implications here, he said, but he had found it unpleasant and thought many other people would too.

This man just does not get it. Well if he and they did find the loud music unpleasant, and many of us would, it is largely a matter of personal taste not legisaltion. For they have many options open to them to address it, including leaving or complaining to the licensee. And of course it is not a problem limited to all (but only) LIVE music and the equipment could have been confiscated. But the place most probably had a PEL anyway!

Then he talked of a pub that was packed with people listening to a local band, and said there would be safety implications there. As you'll see, he hadn't answered my questions at all.

Overcrowding is not limited to all (but only) LIVE music events and would equally apply to live TV sports in pubs, but is easily dealt with by imposing a safe capacity on ALL Premises Licenses. For some reason, Dr Howells does not wish to include this activity in those that need prior local authority permission (or safe capities).

Why are they so determined to make all (but only) LIVE music and musicians scape-goats, when their (safety) arguments are so clearly bogus?

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 16 Nov 02 - 11:31 AM

Pub revolution will cut trouble. Ann Perkins writing in the Guardian.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,3605,841267,00.html

She did not manage to get Sheila Miller's name correct, but is one article on the Queen's Speech that does mention the effects on music.

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Nov 02 - 01:54 PM

BBC Online News had this account of the event. No mention of music again!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2479609.stm

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Nov 02 - 11:49 AM

This from Sheila Miller.

Well, I got into the press conference, and managed to ask two questions.
However, the answers were the predictable ones and not very helpful. I
asked, 'Given that there is already plenty of legislation on noise and
safety, why are England and Wales the only countries where it is necessary
to have a licence to sing or play music?

Why is a pub that is assumed to be
safe for 60 people to watch satellite TV not automatically presumed to be
safe for 30 people to listen to three Somerset folk singers?'

Tessa Jowell
handed the question over to Kim Howells to answer. He said, 'Well, I got
into a bit of trouble for my remarks about folk singers.' 'Oh, I know,' I
said. People laughed. He then said something about having to consider
individual cases. He said he had recently been in a pub, having a quiet
drink when a musician had come in with two amplifiers and had started
blasting away. Obviously there were no safety implications here, he said,
but he had found it unpleasant and thought many other people would too.
Then he talked of a pub that was packed with people listening to a local
band, and said there would be safety implications there. As you'll see, he
hadn't answered my questions at all.

So I said, 'But, as I said, there is
already legislation that deals with noise and safety in pubs. The
traditional music of this country is generally played without amplification
and without causing any disturbance. Why is there a presumption against
live music?'

Tessa J took over at this point; she said that the new licence
would cover music in pubs as well as the sale of alcohol, and that in fact
it would make things easier for people running pubs. Someone then came in
with a question about the government's claim that the new law would cut
costs for licensees, and I wasn't able to get in again. But they obviously
had no intention of answering the questions anyway.

Another journalist asked what the MU's attitude to the Bill was; she
understood that they were unhappy about it and thought it would make it
harder for musicians to get work. Jowell said that she believed the MU's
concern was ill-founded, and that in fact the new law would not have this
effect.
Since I got back to work a short while ago, I've had a phone call from
someone on The Guardian, asking my views as a folk club organiser on the
Bill. Someone called Ann Perkins is writing a piece on the Bill, and she
was getting various people's opinions on it. So I hope that article will be
a big one and that it will include a bit about the threat to live music.

And

I've just had a call from Ann Perkins on the Guardian. She says the article
is going to be published tomorrow. She was phoning to check the spelling of
my name, because she's using a quote from me. It may get subbed out for the
sake of length, of course, but at least that means she is covering the
issue of live music in pubs.
We should all buy the Guardian tomorrow and send or e-mail letters to the
paper about the potential harm to folk clubs, sessions and other live
musical events.


Guardian Letters (with name and address) to
E-mail Address(es):
[e-mail]

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Nov 02 - 02:09 PM

Rather short notice I know but is anyone up for it?

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Nov 02 - 06:57 AM

The press only launch of the Licensing Bill is set for 10.30 at the Red Lion in Whitehall tomorrow, Friday 15th November.

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Nov 02 - 05:51 PM

Word is filtering through of a press launch of the Bill by Tessa Jowell to be held in London this Friday.

In of all places, The Red Lion in Whitehall!!!!

The very same place where the Musician's Union have help two protests against the Bill's entertainment reform proposals.

An invitation was given for Dr Howells to attend the last one, with Billy Bragg singing with MPs, but was declined as it was too left wing.

It does not look as if the invitation is to be returned. The MU do not appear to have received an invite...........Maybe they need some music?

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 07:48 PM

The thing is that we can pretty well guarantee that the authorities will just smile benignly and ignore it, except maybe to pass a word to their friends in the press about how this shows how tolerant the system is, and how there's nothing for us to worry about, and how it's just crankish to complain.

That isn't to say it's not a very good idea in spite of that.

I agree with Shambles that we're in for a longish haul. A standing illegal session, as a sort of picket, in line with Shambles' suggestion, would be a good idea - especially if it could develop into a place where visiting musicians to London or to England could drop in on. But it would be very dependent on there being a hard core of committed Londoners to keep on keeping on. (They needn't all be folkies - in fact better if they weren't, because there are different sorts of music under threat as well.)

Of course, with a war being cooked up, this is all seen by most people as a pretty peripheral issue. Maybe some combined effort could be worked up, such as a continuing musical anti-war picket. This would by definition be an unauthorised breach of the PEL legislation.

True enough, there might be those who are not against the war, but who are concerned about the threat to our right to make music - but then if they were to organise a musical counter-picket in favour of the war, that would still be in breach of the PEL rules, so we'd get two for the price of one.

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: fiddler
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 02:58 PM

Based on Discussion and aquired knowledge. I think perhaps we need to wait and see the published paper and then begin lobbying in force. The Musical demo seems a good idea with much support - lets see what the paper says - assuming it is contained in the queens speech!!!!

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Nov 02 - 04:44 PM

For circulation

226 MPs have now signed public entertainment licence Early Day Motion 1182. Contrary to my earlier email it seems that Wednesday 6 November will be the last day for MPs to sign. On Thursday Parliament will shut down and the EDM list will be cleared. Parliament reopens on Wednesday 13th with the State Opening and the Queen's Speech. A new set of EDMs will be started. 226 signatures is a fantastic result and is extremely useful in terms of campaign PR. I would like to thank everyone who took the time to contact their MP. (Latecomers can still try faxing: www.faxyourmp.com)

It is almost certain that the Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Bill will be announced in the Queen's Speech and there is every sign that the government is serious about pushing this reform through as quickly as possible. Media coverage is likely to focus on 24-hour drinking in spite of the extensive media coverage of the MU campaign and EDM 1182.

There is no indication that the government has budged on its 'none in a bar' proposals. This has been its position since 1997. Unless there are last minute amendments to the draft Bill, 'none in a bar' will be the starting point of the new regime. Hosting one unamplified guitarist in a restaurant will be a criminal offence without an explicit licensing permission; providing broadcast entertainment on satellite or terrestrial tv will be exempt. Fees will be set centrally, it's true, but local authorities will be empowered to impose 'necessary' conditions on almost every performance of live music, in almost any premises.

The media element of the MU campaign cannot really begin until the Bill itself is published. Our public response will depend very much on the precise content of the Bill and it would be premature to issue any press release until it is published. It would also jeopardise our participation in the continuing Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Bill consultation run by Department for Culture, Media and Sport. Intensive lobbying continues behind the scenes, of course.

We have important allies in the campaign to persuade the government that its approach is unlikely to encourage live music at the grass roots, notably the Music Industries Association (Andrew Bishop, MD of Carlsbro, is leading on this, and generating some very valuable industry publicity), the English Folk Dance and Song Society and the Arts Council. But in the coming months MPs are likely to take most notice of constituents who take the trouble to write or fax. I therefore hope you will continue to take an active part in the campaign.

I will keep you informed of developments. In the meantime thanks again for your help.

Hamish Birchall

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: GUEST,noddy
Date: 31 Oct 02 - 11:08 AM

just make sure no one brings a banjo, a bohdran, or accordian or eveyone else will go home.

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 31 Oct 02 - 06:40 AM

A session protest outside Parliament? Great idea... but think carefully about the timing. Bear in mind that if the Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Bill is announced in the Queen's Speech on 13 November, it is likely to be a few weeks before it is actually published. Until it is published, along with the accompanying 'guidance' promised by the DCMS, we cannot be absolutely certain of its contents.

It should be remembered that there are two related but different concerns here. The problems presented by the current legislation and those presented by the proposed Bill.

In the unlikely event that the published Bill contains all of the common sense measures, that presently it does not contain, we still have the problem of the current legislation. This will still be with us for some time, possibly years? If the published Bill turns out to be the expected rubbish, although it may be wise to wait for the maximum coverage and effect, we should be preparing now for a long haul to ensure that we do not lose any more events.

Whilst we may have to accept that no matter how senseless we may feel it is, more than two 'performers' in conventional public entertainment, is illegal without a PEL and the only arrival of new legislation can change this.

However, the interpretation of the word 'performer' as a customer making unpaid music for their own pleasure in a pub, is even stated by one local authority, who used it to prevent unpaid folk sessions, 'as never been tested in Court'.

It has been established (by Hamish's hard work), that the matter of who exactly is considered to be a performer, is one for each individual Licensing Authority (usually the borough council). Until the new legislation comes in and possibly makes the word irrelevant, this definition is a matter for our locally elected representatives i.e. our local councillors.

I have not yet come across any elected representative, at national or local level that thinks it is right for this interoperation to be used to prevent ordinary people making music in a pub......Or that two customers making music, automatically make the premises unsafe, when joined by a third customer. Employees of the council wrongly tell them, that the law gives them no choice.

So it should be easy, in theory, for the remaining term of this current legislation, to get our local authorities to use a more sensible definition of the word 'performer', one that did not risk preventing folk song and dancing activities in particular. Regular Morris on private (pub) land is prevented by this interpretation. In practice it has, to date been impossible.

The steamroller effect, that this local authority enforcement is based on anything more than just a myth of some sound case law precedent, has caused and is still causing many session to close, in many case just in fear that a local authority may take action.

But there is case that has established that customers making their own unpaid music, on a regular basis, is not Licensable Public Entertainment, Brearly -v- Moreley 1899. There must be a good chance that if a licensee was prepared to go to Court to enable a threatened session, that they would win. The sad thing about this legislation is that this is most unlikely to happen, so the bullying just continues.

This is NOT by any means a complete list but only a list where first hand detailed accounts are available. All of the sessions listed here have been affected (terminally in many cases), by local authority enforcement or the fear of it. All of this enforcement of unpaid sessions is broadly based on the interpretation of the 'two in a bar rule' that members of the public, making unpaid music for their own pleasure, are counted as performers in a public entertainment.

An interpretation that Greenwich Council (who appear in the list twice) accept and freely state that this interpretation has never been tested in Court.

And the Government Minister responsible, Dr Howells states in a letter to Michael Portillo 14/03/02.

"However, under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 1964 a public entertainment licence is not required if music or dancing is performed by less than three performers on licensed premises i.e. the 'two in a bar rule'. The rule is intended to apply to public performances put on by a public house to entertain the public and should not prevent ordinary people singing together or dancing in public houses".

Sessions/singarounds

The Old Ale House, Oxford April 2000
The Cove House Inn, Portland December 2000
The Welsh Harp, Waltham Abbey ….2001
The Cock, Stansted Mountfitchett, May 2002
The Guildford Arms, Greenwich, May 2002
The Cricketers, Greenwich, May 2002
The Cannon, Newport Pagnall, May 2002
The Bull, Stony Stratford, June 2002
The Blue Bell, Helpston, September 2002
The Lands End, Twyford, October 2002
The Ruiston Inn, Taunton, Oct 2002

Menbers only clubs

The Old King's Head, The Belper Folk Club, May 2002
Broadacres, The Bridlington Folk Club, July 2002
The Henry VIII Hotel, Bayswater, Tall Poppy Presents, July 2002

Miscellaneous

Waterstones Book Shop, London, 2001
Broadstairs Folk Festival, One-Man-Show, August 2002.

Please help to ensure that we do not lose even one more event to this stupidity.

http://www.faxyourmp.com/>http://www.faxyourmp.com/

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Oct 02 - 06:54 PM

PELs links to all Mudcat threads on the various aspect of this issue.

I have now put a few useful non Mudcat links there also.

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Oct 02 - 05:36 PM

This was the original Early Day Motion EDM 1182:
That this House recognises the social, cultural and economic value of a thriving grass roots entertainment industry; notes that entertainment and music provision in venues ranging from pubs to village halls not only attracts vital custom but also encourages cultural diversity and growth; further notes that under the current two in a bar system it is illegal to allow, for instance, three folk singers to perform in a pub; agrees with the Minister for Sport that the current Public Entertainment Licensing system is archaic and just plain daft; and calls upon the Government to reform licensing laws to reduce the cost and bureacracy of entertainment licensing and promote the use of live music and singing in pubs and clubs; and urges the Government to introduce a Licensing Law Reform Bill in the next Queen's Speech

Here are some discussions in the Commons by Dr Howells and others about this (I've just tried and failed to make clickies for them - sorry)

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmhansrd/cm020722/debtext/20722-02.htm#20722-02_spmin0

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200102/cmhansrd/cm020722/debtext/20722-01.htm#20722-01_spmin0

And this after 3 hours searching and eventually the help of a Commons researcher (who also couldn't find it!) is the guidelines for the new legislation

http://www.culture.gov.uk/new_responsibilities/hoc1300.html

Interesting, if not helpful?
Cheers!
Hille

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Oct 02 - 09:41 AM

I don't really see how this idea can be counter-productive, even at this stage, as long as loud rock bands and DJs/MCs, with portable power supplies, are always firmly discouraged. …..Smiles.

But I think that we may as well face it, one such gathering will not do much good. We are in for a long haul.

I see it as just providing a spot in central London where local and visiting musicians and can gather and jam. It could be a regular gathering, say on every Sunday, the traffic noise will be (slightly) less then.. It could always be promoted as a tourist attraction and would form a handy and colour-full backdrop to any media coverage of the issue.

Pretty much as the long-running gathering outside South Africa House was, if hopefully not quite so long-running, but possibly could always be swelled on a particular day or week, from us country bumkins?

London's Speakers Corner has its speakers. Where will Musicians Corner be?

The legalities, necessary permissions and conditions I think are the first priorities. How about an approach to the Mayor of London? Or is that not a good idea? Any experts?

Is Parliament Square a good spot, or even possible? It is very visible, if very traffic noisy.

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Oct 02 - 08:51 AM

Richard The point you are making clearly is that the present PEL system, with all its over regulation has not dealt with your noise problem. Where most of the places the noise you refer to, easpecially the late night ones, would have a PEL and conform to the present system.

Adequate noise controls do exist to deal with this but are not used and it is more difficult in these cases as the premises have in effect obtained official permission to make a noise, in the form of the PEL. If it as bad as you state, I am sure it could be dealt with now.

The MU's idea is clearly to not regulate that which does not present the problem, only that which does, the Government propose to regulate everthing, so it is not necessary for any division in our ranks or efforts at this stage.

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: GUEST,Hamish Birchall
Date: 29 Oct 02 - 06:58 AM

A session protest outside Parliament? Great idea... but think carefully about the timing. Bear in mind that if the Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Bill is announced in the Queen's Speech on 13 November, it is likely to be a few weeks before it is actually published. Until it is published, along with the accompanying 'guidance' promised by the DCMS, we cannot be absolutely certain of its contents. New drafts are emerging as I write, and it is possible (though unlikely, I agree) that the government may change its absurd position that satellite tv in pubs should be unregulated by entertainment licensing, but the provision of virtually all live music should be a criminal offence unless first licensed.

Richard: I assume you are referring to the MU campaign when you write that the 'current campaign lacks credibility' because it maintains 'there is no need to regulate electric music'.

A few thoughts: 1) Most people complaining about noise from pubs are not complaining about music at all, but noisy people outside the premises (over 80% of complaints); 2)where there are complaints about loud music, the majority are about loud recorded music; 3)the Institute of Alcohol Studies which canvasses the views of residents' associations across the country about licensing reform tell me none of these associations has ever raised live music as an issue; 4) the National Society for Clean Air says that 'in general local authorities are content with the flexibility the nuisance provisions allow. However, for adequate enforcement there is a need for clarification (for officers and the public) and better resourcing'; 5)it is, of course, the Government that is proposing that the provision of broadcast entertainment or music, or recorded music, in pubs should be exempt from entertainment licensing controls; 6) it can only do this (surely?) because it believes subsisting legislation is adequate to deal with overcrowding, noise, or crime and disorder that may result from these entertainments.

Hamish

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: GUEST,Richard Bridge (cookie and format C)
Date: 29 Oct 02 - 05:16 AM

The Bill is being finalised now so December will probably be too late.

The present campaign is lacking in credibility because it tries to say there is no need to regulate electric music. I live between two pubs. Before anyone says "Well why did you move there", neither had electric music before I did so. Anyone who says there is no need to regulate electric music, or that the law already effectively does so must be from another planet. Even if you think I am wrong (ie if you argue there is already the means of regulation to the extent necessary) you will NEVER convince the millions of ordinary people who live with or see others living with the problems talking in a normal voice in their own homes, sweeping up the broken glass in the road before they can drive their own car away, calling the police or ambulances to street fights, or even safely walking out of their own house after 10 pm. Whatever the current law actually says, it seems to be impossible to get these things sorted. So regulation is needed - for this.

What does NOT need the regulatory mechanism that the above demands is acoustic music. Apart from a limited few singers (one is a 'catter, so no names) of extraordinary power (and collections of trombones etc), acoustic music does not need regulation for reasons of noise, safety or public order. But one electric musician with one of those small Hughes and Kettner rigs (two small satellites and one sub) can be heard 300 yards up the road.

I'm quite likely to join you all (and if we win, I'll have cut my own throat as far as living in peace at home ever again is concerned) - but the unnecessary threat is to acoustic music.

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: Mr Happy
Date: 29 Oct 02 - 03:42 AM

a conversation at a local session last week was if, after the new legistlation comes in- if we see some 'suits' from the local licensing authority come in- we could all sing 'god save the queen'.

we thought it might make for a good headline in the papers.

'GOVERNMENT BANS SINGING 'GOD SAVE THE QUEEN'!

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: ET
Date: 28 Oct 02 - 04:51 PM

This is a subject that concerns me and have written many times on this to the Department of Culture. They do their best to convince me that all will be well. The application is for a "standard" licence they say and that the PEL basic part will come as standard but I fear once Local Authorities let rip anything could happen - as does now with applications to them. They show little understanding and no common sense on this. May not be able to make the grand session in Lodnon but have now written to Tony Blair appealing to his former life as a guitarist and asked him to keep a close eye on his culture minister, to make sure that good intentions are brought into reality. Maybe I have wasted a stampt, but one nenver knows and we still live in a democracy, don't we?

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: fiddler
Date: 28 Oct 02 - 03:57 PM

OK I put the link out!

I got 10 very interested parties!

Is this enought to think we can get it together B4 christmas?

If the feeling is yes then I'll begin to get some ideas together.

I'll need a key 'expert' to tell me the depth of the act.

WE need to get it out to all music clubs and sessions thgouhtout the UK to really make it work.

Also anyone know how the police rules work in Parliament square?

The press and TV will be involved too!

Quick views will give me an idea proceed or not ! I'd love to but can't go it alone.

Also off Mudcat I think is best so please both reply to this thread and give a personal message.

[e-mail]

My business email.

CU all - I hope!

A

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: Dead Horse
Date: 25 Oct 02 - 01:04 PM

Maybe we should all gather in Parliament Square, sing a chorus of Alices Restuarant, and all walk out. They'd think it was a movement....(shit, wrong war)

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: Alice
Date: 25 Oct 02 - 11:28 AM

.. and if 1000 showed up and sang carols, chances are most would know the lyrics. Good idea. Show how silly the law is.

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Oct 02 - 08:23 AM

http://www.jazznights.co.uk/musicissues.htm

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: DMcG
Date: 25 Oct 02 - 07:05 AM

More on the early Dec comment - if we sang carols we could also make the point that this is potentially banned under the PEL rules as well

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: DMcG
Date: 25 Oct 02 - 07:03 AM

I'll turn up as well (if its not early Dec when I'm out of the country).

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Admiral
Date: 25 Oct 02 - 06:55 AM

Fiddler

Good Man!. Put my name down. The idea of not being able to make music in your pub or bar when you're not interfering with anyone else is not only downright silly but also against human rights. It is all the more offensive that the reasons behind it seem to be to make more money for government - and this from the majority of us who make music for the enjoyment not for cash. If anything, Folk Music has cost me a fortune and I don't regret a penny of it! The 'approach your MP' line doesn't seem to be having any effect so maybe direct action is what is required.

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Oct 02 - 04:35 AM

We do need to do everthing we can to raise the profile and bring to the attention of everyone, exactly what this new legislation is proposing. An not just in the UK.

Folk from all over world were staggered to hear about there being a problem with more than two 'performers'. And were willing to help.

If we can make them understand now that this is being replaced with a new legislation where no live music was possible anywhere without advanced official permission and that to do so is a criminal offence, we may get some much needed support.

http://www.geocities.com/actionformusic/ Signing up to the email list on this site will enable all like-mided souls to be able to work together.

Let us stop talking and get together and do what we can. Yes Fiddler it is a good idea.........Just do it please....... 'You build it and they WILL come'......We can all suppoet you and make sure of that.

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: Leadfingers
Date: 24 Oct 02 - 07:32 PM

Yeee as they Say Bloody hah.

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: Alice
Date: 24 Oct 02 - 07:26 PM

One huge session in parliament square. What a great idea.

Subject: RE: PEL - Idea
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Oct 02 - 07:05 PM

Sounds fun. It would also have the merit of emphasising two things that tend to get overlooked - firstly, as you say, that it's not just folk music that is affected; and secondly that, as it stands (and will continue to stand after whatever "reform" is carried out) anyone who organises a musical performance in a public place without a Public Entertainment Licence is breaking the law - it's by no means just or even primarily a matter to do with pubs.

So strictly speaking the direct action in this case would be you, rather than the musicians...Still the authorities will probably ignore the law-breaking side of it, to avoid embarassment.

Subject: PEL - Idea
From: fiddler
Date: 24 Oct 02 - 06:39 PM

OK we are all beefing - there are a lot of anomolies on what is happening.

What about some direct action and btinging it all to the Public attention.

Imagine 1000 (or more) musicians and singers in parliament square pressing our case and gettting public acknowledgement.

Mudcat is probably not the best forum for organising this but the act ranges wide - I have a classical singing pal also hit by this problem.

I will organise from home if this is thought to be a good idea.

Please say yes!!!

A