kim howells does it again (PEL)

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again (PEL)
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Jan 03 - 07:01 PM

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=367972

Dr Howells has a novel coming out and is interviewed (above)in the Independent and in his constant search for the popular vote, is now having a dig a video games.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again (PEL)
From: Snuffy
Date: 12 Jan 03 - 11:58 AM

I'm out of work and on the Dole
So stuff yer Red Flag up yer 'ole

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again (PEL)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Jan 03 - 11:39 AM

It strikes me that Kim Howells is a classic case of

The working class can kiss my arse,
I've got a foreman's job at last.

To the tune of the Red Flag. (Does anyone know any other words to go with that couplet?)

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again (PEL)
From: GUEST,Dave kenningham
Date: 12 Jan 03 - 11:31 AM

Up the workers!
(I just wanted this topic nearer the top of the forum!)

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again (PEL)
From: Willa
Date: 12 Jan 03 - 08:55 AM

What a pity that the 2nd sentence of Mr Howell's letter to The Telegraph didn't read:
'The last thing any of us would want is to threaten this country's great traditions of *live* music, which is epitomised by *the many* rich and vibrant *folk festivals*. Your readers can rest assured that, as minister with responsibility for licensing, I won't let this happen.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again (PEL)
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Jan 03 - 08:03 AM

We have the evidence and we must use it to show the media and our MPs that good intentions alone have not protected valuable activies from poorly worded legislation in the past and currently.

Despite being informed of this and ignoring it, for over two years, the fact that he now claims that the new badly worded legislation has 'unintentionally' threatened church concert traditions should make him re-examine the whole Bill.

We must take this period to make sure that if he does not do this, many more people than now, will be bringing the failings of the wording, to his attention.

I find myself agreeing with Dr Howells about singing Happy Birthday under the Bill. For I am sure he means that you drive a road vehicle into and around the restaurant, make sure it keeps moving and sing Happy Birthday from the back, you will not reqire a licence.

Of course the prosecution referred to was in a lowly pub, not the sort of restaurant that Dr Howells and Co now frequent. Different middle class rules seem to apply in restaurants and churches, than apply to pubs.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: DMcG
Date: 12 Jan 03 - 03:19 AM

I hope someone will make sure that Kim Howells and the Daily Telergaph readers are remindeed that there has been at least one case, even under the present law, where people singing Happy Birthday did actually result in a prosecution. (I haven't got the details to hand or I'd do it myself.)

I wrote about this on Friday. No doubt others did as well.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: GUEST,Tom Hamilton
Date: 11 Jan 03 - 10:40 PM

I still don't know how they are, as I'm on holiday in Australia, and here they don't really give us real news.
So all we get is local news and that's it.
Unless you tune into ABC or SBS or here in Perth a channel called Access 31, then you get real news.

I agree that the Turner prize is for Artists who are techanally Bullshit, and the 20 thounsand pounds should go to something better.
Someone who can actually do art.
So get rid of these so called artists who are crap and stop wasting money on them.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Jan 03 - 07:25 PM

It looks pretty clear they are going to back off from the church bashing side of it. And I suspect they'll likely do something similar to reducenthe adverse effect on school concerts and so forth. The bits we are more worried about are just as crazy, but we can't rely on having a bunch of bishops in the House of Lords ready to make trouble.

Still that letter sounds like the letter of a man who is feeling uder pressure. Notably that paragraph: "If an unintentional result of the Licensing Bill is that the future of church music is threatened, then we will amend it. As I told the House of Commons on December 16, we are reconsidering our position on this issue and we will announce our conclusions as soon as possible."

I hope someone will make sure that Kim Howells and the Daily Telergaph readers are remindeed that there has been at least one case, even under the present law, where people singing Happy Birthday did actually result in a prosecution. (I haven't got the details to hand or I'd do it myself.)

Here's a snippet from a BBC potted biography. The son of a Communist lorry driver, Howells was caught up in the revolutionary atmosphere of the late 1960s while a student at Hornsey College of Art. Like many of his contemporaries, he was involved in "sit-ins" and other demonstrations before becoming disillusioned with student politics.

It's bloody weird the way a man with Howells background and experience back in the 60s could get into this kind of nonsense. What happens to man that he ends up standing on his head and attacking the libertarian and comuniitarian principles he once probably sincerely held.

Hornsey wasn't "student politics" in the sense of the stuff that apparatchik creeps like Jack Straw (currently Foreign Secretary) was involved in. It was about the most wholesome episode of student activism of the period, genuinely directed towards matters of direct importance to the students. Including lots of live music and no bloody Public Entertainment Licences.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: GUEST,Tom Jones
Date: 11 Jan 03 - 06:51 PM

No wonder this tosser doesn't like music, he was born in Wales!

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Jan 03 - 06:43 PM

Letter from Dr Howells. Daily Telegraph 10 January 2003

Does Licensing Bill threaten freedom?

SIR- Your report (Jan 7) suggests that the future of the Three Choirs Festival will be jeopardised by changes to public entertainment licensing contained in the Government's Licensing Bill.

The last thing any of us would want is to threaten this country's great traditions of church music, which is epitomised by this rich and vibrant festival. Your readers can rest assured that, as minister with responsibility for licensing, I won't let this happen.

If an unintentional result of the Licensing Bill is that the future of church music is threatened, then we will amend it. As I told the House of Commons on December 16, we are reconsidering our position on this issue and we will announce our conclusions as soon as possible.

The report also stated that the Bill would mean that singing Happy Birthday in a restaurant would be illegal without a licence.

This is absolute nonsense. It is just one of a flurry of myths being put about by the Musicians' Union and others, who would be much better advised to work with the licensed trade to stimulate maximum take-up of the highly deregulatory reforms that the Licensing Bill offers.

Kim Howells
Minister for Licensing
Department for Culture, Media and Sport
London SW1

[e-mail]

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Jan 03 - 08:38 PM

As attacks go, I'd have thought that piece from the Guardian wasn't particularly fierce. In fact I'd call it quite mild.

I have the profoundest contempt for people who carry guns, but I'd need to know a lot more than Kim Howells seems to know about any kind of music before I'd shoot my mouth off in that kind of way.

The man seems a bit of a rent-a-quote.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Jan 03 - 03:46 PM

More informed Opinion in The Times.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,482-536071,00.html

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 07 Jan 03 - 03:49 PM

MrHappy: try holding down the 'alt' key and typing 033 !

Nigel

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: Gareth
Date: 07 Jan 03 - 12:51 PM

Richard - Only the "gaurdian" would be crass enough to publish such insulting tosh - tho I see from this mornings edition that they are back pedeling fast !!!!

Gareth

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: Mr Happy
Date: 07 Jan 03 - 07:54 AM

fiddler- don't bang your head- print out some petitions- it's a nice day- go out & get some more signatures **exclamation mark**

ps i'd do exclamation marks but that keys not wkng**exclamation mark**

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: fiddler
Date: 07 Jan 03 - 07:16 AM

Slightly off topic here!

A point which makes it not too relevent apart from Howells getting it wrong possibly! Surely not!

John Lenon (and the Beatles in his earlier existence)did not manage to create love and world peace!
Britney has not got all UK girls staying virgins till they are 21 (at least)!

How many of us turned in to gangsters after Al Capone flims!
Or bought buses to go on holiday after Summer Holiday!

So ....as we sing all sorts of songs about sex (ball of yarn etc.) Drugs (alchohol) and many other topics perhaps we should be seen as part of a subversive culture - or is that what KH actually thinks.

If you like art and freedom then you are against him! Hmmm....

Think back to Stalin perhaps the Labour party is not that new after all!

A

Sorry I feel frivolous today!;-) Fed up of banging head on brick walls!

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: daithi
Date: 07 Jan 03 - 07:04 AM

Quite so Gareth, if you'll pardon my twopennorth worth. Never forget - governments never respond to argument, only to pressure.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Jan 03 - 06:23 AM

Comment in today's Independent.

http://argument.independent.co.uk/commentators/story.jsp?story=366976

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Jan 03 - 05:48 AM

Gareth, we have seen that trying to be nice to the minister and hope he will be friendly does not work.

The Musicians' union won praise from the government for their rational and constructive approach in consultation. But they got no concessions. The government was just playing them along.

This government will only listen if forced.

And if you don't like what the Guardian says, don't blame the messenger.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: Gareth
Date: 07 Jan 03 - 02:25 AM

Congratulations Roger, that type of attack on the minister, as typified by the Gaurdian, "our culture is always wrong" is just the attitude that is gaurenteed to win friends and influence people in the Ministry.

Gareth

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Jan 03 - 02:02 AM

Howells accused of failing to understand that gun culture in black music is reflection of society in which fans live

Fiachra Gibbons, arts correspondent
Monday January 6, 2003
The Guardian

The outspoken culture minister, Kim Howells, last night found himself at the centre of a race row after claiming that the time had come to stand up to the "idiots" of rap culture.

Mr Howells, who previously attacked exhibits at the Turner Prize show as "cold, mechanical conceptual bullshit", launched into an extraordinary attack on black British music hours after the police had criticised the music industry for "glamorising guns".
During a radio discussion on the killing of two black teenagers caught in the crossfire between rival gangs in Birmingham after a new year party, Mr Howells laid part of the blame at the door of British rappers.

"The events in Birmingham are symptomatic of something very, very serious," he said. "For years I have been very worried about these hateful lyrics that these boasting macho idiot rappers come out with.
"It is a big cultural problem. Lyrics don't kill people but they don't half enhance the fare we get from videos and films. It has created a culture where killing is almost a fashion accessory."
He reserved his greatest fury for the controversial south London garage outfit, So Solid Crew, three of whose 30 members have been convicted or are awaiting trial on gun offences.

"Idiots like the So Solid Crew are glorifying gun culture and violence," the minister claimed. "It is something new. I heard very interesting comments about [violence] in Victorian times and thugs on the street. But they didn't have these methods of popularising this stuff. It is very worrying and we ought to stand up and say it."
Rappers who carry guns in their videos are "particularly sick", he said.

Earlier, So Solid Crew were singled out for criticism by Metropolitan police assistant commissioner Tarique Ghaffur, who blamed a "backdrop of music" for alienating young men and encouraging them to use weapons as fashion statements.

But last night Conor McNicholas, editor of the music magazine NME, described the minister's outburst as "deeply racist".
"He doesn't understand the culture. It is this idea again that we have to do something about these out-of-control black people in our streets and the nasty culture they are perpetuating," he said.
"They are deeply racist sentiments. We have to be absolutely clear, the gun culture is a function of urban deprivation and not because of the music. The music reflects the experience of young people and doesn't create it.

"There is more rap music listened to and bought by white kids in Swindon than there is by black kids in Hackney, and nobody is talking about the gun culture on the streets of white suburban Britain."
Mr McNicholas said he was surprised that Mr Howells had chosen to roam so far from his brief, which mainly involves tourism.

"He clearly doesn't know what he is talking about. We have to recognise that these are young kids who are growing up in very difficult environments who happen to make music as a way of expressing themselves and their frustrations. Just because these guys are making music about the situation they are in does not mean they are perpetuating the culture. The music is not creating the problem."

So Solid Crew, in common with many black musicians and promoters contacted by the Guardian yesterday, said they were sick of being tarred with the "drugs and violence" stereotype, and several refused to comment, claiming that debate only reinforced prejudice. Promoter Lance Lewis said it was nonsense to see rap as bloodthirsty and perverse. "No rapper con dones killing, anyone who says that doesn't know what they are talking about."

A spokeswoman for So Solid Crew did say that the rise in gun violence had nothing to do with music. "It's poverty and crime which are escalating. Cocaine addiction is escalating too. They are just reflecting what they see around them. Their music is reflecting society just as Robert de Niro reflected American gangster society in his film roles. They are out there trying to make a positive difference in British black culture."

She pointed to the fact that Ms Dynamite, whom the police have praised for her stance against drug dealers and black- on-black violence, has defended the band, who played a key part in her own emergence.

Ms Dynamite has dismissed as "bullshit" the idea that the garage scene is inextricably linked with violence. "The media have blown it out of all proportion. Garage is a young London scene. That's why people in power are afraid of us and try everything to shut us down," she said. "There is violence wherever you go and the rave is a small part of it. It is a metaphor for life in general."

She also refused to condemn So Solid's Ashley Walters, aka Asher D, who was released from jail in October after an 18-month sentence for possessing a gun. Walters, a former child actor, had been the subject of several death threats before his arrest following an altercation with a traffic warden.

"I'm not one to judge, but he was naive," Ms Dynamite said. "Anyone who thinks they can carry a gun in this country is in for a shock."
Academic Ben Bowling, of King's College, London, who is studying the effects of gun culture, claimed rap was hugely misunderstood.
"Not only Ms Dynamite but lots of other bands like De La Soul and Us Three sing out against violence and drug culture. Rap is a very wide church," he said.

He believed it was unfortunate that Mr Howells' comments had come at a time when "there is a movement on the street and in the music industry saying 'no' to violence". The only way gun crime was going to stop, he said, was for communities themselves to reject it, as had happened in the United States.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/gun/Story/0,2763,869428,00.html

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Jan 03 - 04:49 PM

Details of the latest by Dr Howells in the today's Guardian.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/gun/Story/0,2763,869428,00.html

Are there any cultural forms that he has not insulted?

He does not seem to grasp that he is paid to support culture.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Jan 03 - 01:43 PM

In Camden a long-standing gig at La Brocca in West End Lane was busted and the licensee threatened with a £20,000 fine because a music student had been seen jamming with the regular duo.

A few months later, in Waterstone's bookshop in Hampstead, an eminent young string quartet was forced to sit in full concert dress with their instruments while a CD was played in lieu of their performance. The Council had intercepted the bookshop's flyers advertising the live music as an accompaniment to a book reading by the former leader of the Amadeus string quartet, Professor Sigmund Nissel. 100 guests, including VIPs, witnessed the non-performance.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Jan 03 - 02:37 AM

I'm sure Dr Howells would not resist a demonstration of his fine sense of humour?

Sadly this is usually expessed at the expense of the supportes of some art form he is paid to promote.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Jan 03 - 05:46 PM

But a performance doesn't have to be dramatic to be a performance...

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 05 Jan 03 - 05:37 PM

A straight reading might not be a dramatic performance. Film and TV contracts have made that distinction for at least 30 years - when granting film or TV rights "straight readings" are usually reserved on some terms or others.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Jan 03 - 04:20 PM

He certainly has a sense of drama and of sheer bare faced cheek, as the following demonstrates.

Dr. Howells: I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will know that, for a long time, the Conservative Government had a chance to get rid of the rule that has existed for 40 years which says that churches inside London have to apply for and receive a licence for the playing and singing of secular music. I hear what he says, but I hope that he will accept that we do not need lessons from the Conservative party on getting rid of the regulations.

This to justify why he was proposing in his Bill, not that that his Government were to be credited with getting rid of this rule, but that the licesing requirement for concerts in London churches, which he critises the Tories for not scrapping, should be extended to the rest of England and Wales!

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Jan 03 - 04:14 PM

Surely telling stories would count as a performance. Which would mean no professional politician could ever speak in a public place again, unless it is specifically licensed for this purpose. That woild include your doorstep.

Maybe there's something to be said for this bill...

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: sian, west wales
Date: 05 Jan 03 - 04:03 PM

Under his proposed Licensing Bill, a book launch would be illegal in a non-licensed premises if he or anyone else reads from the book:   that would qualify as a dramatic performance.

sian

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Jan 03 - 03:07 PM

Do you think he will be having a musical launch of his novel at a Waterstones bookshop?

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Jan 03 - 01:43 PM

Did he say anything worth reporting? The BBC site doesn't have a transcript, so the answer is probably that he didn't.

But here is a link to the interview with Mike Harding last July when Howells merrily fibbed his way through a series of questions about the government's plans for "reform", making various completely spurious promises (as Mike Harding has subsequently pointed out in a recent letter to the Guardian. And here is a profile of Howells, , also from the BBC site.

One interesting thing is that in the picture on that last link Kim Howells looks an absolute dead ringer for sacked broadcaster and lecher Angus Deayton. And we know what Angus Deayton got up to...

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Jan 03 - 06:14 AM

I hear that Dr Howells has found the time to write a novel. This may account for his recent rather high profile, or possibly he thinks he may soon be in need of an alternative career and income?

It is due to published soon and he was on BBC Radio 4, on the 5th January, talking about, amongst other things, rap music. Referring to So Solid Crew, as 'those idiots'.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Dec 02 - 10:21 AM

See also

Dr Howells now insults the USA

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 30 Nov 02 - 08:59 PM

The original letters published in the Times can be seen on the following. It would be most useful to have some more letters to the Times to enable the debate to continue there. Is there anything you would like to say there in reply to Dr Howells?

Fighting the PEL

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 30 Nov 02 - 01:16 PM

Dr Howells
Some churches fear that disproportionate and costly conditions may be attached to licences. However, under the Bill all licensing authorities would be required to have regard to guidance issued by the Secretary of State. And it is intended that this will make clear that it would be wholly inappropriate to attach disproportionate conditions to licences affecting churches and other charitable institutions.

Gareth
The problem is not so much the legislation itself, but the need to ensure that Local Authorities act reasonably.

I agree but, why then have our civils servants (and Local Government Association) been so determined, and permitted by the Government, to include the above institutions, and many others in the licensing requirements Bill in the first place?

Does each Brownie carol concert have to go before the Secretary of State for dispensation, as Dr Howells stated on Radoi 4?

If these institutions did not appear in the Schedule 1 definitions, it would never be possible for local authorities to EVER apply disproportionate conditions.

That I think is what most people, who have first hand experience of 'silly' Local Authority enforcememt nd conditions were hoping for.

This is new legislation, we could surely reasonably expect it to address the disproportionate conditions, if as Dr Howells implies in his letter it has been and IS now a potential problem?

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: Gareth
Date: 30 Nov 02 - 12:09 PM

Now this whole question of PEL's arose from the actions of certain councils trating PELs as a cash cow.

This new proposed legislation takes that discretion on the size of fees to scales laid down by the S of State.

The problem is not so much the legislation itself, but the need to ensure that Local Authorities act reasonably.

Yes - lobby etc. whilst the legislation is before Parliament, but ultimatley it is the Local Authorities who must be kept under review.

For those of you living in England next May there are Coucil elections in most areas, and London.

Now is the time to lobby Councillors and Candidates to ensure that the Licensing Committees are not controlled by the "Jobsworths".

A point to hold in mind is that if the fees are held at a reasonable level, then the opportunity to empire build, and act as a cash cow is not there and supercilious actions by inspectors will be cost ineffective.

Gareth

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 30 Nov 02 - 10:40 AM

Howells – Letter to Times - November 30, 2002

Intended purpose of Licensing Bill
From the Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport

Sir, The Licensing Bill would not criminalise impromptu or spontaneous singing (letters, November 27). What it would do is ensure that, where music and dancing are to be a regular feature at a venue, local residents would have the opportunity to air their concerns with the local licensing authority before a decision was made.

The Bill would improve the opportunities for musicians to perform in public venues. The Government does not accept that certain types of music, for example acoustic folk music, are never noisy and should therefore be excluded from the new licensing regime.

The licensing authority would have the power to impose necessary and proportionate conditions in order to protect residents and customers.

The Licensing Bill would allow people to have a good night out and enjoy themselves, while making sure that those that wish to stay in for a peaceful evening can do so.

Fees for licences will be set centrally by the Secretary of State under secondary legislation, and it would be open to her, where appropriate, to set fees at a reduced level for charities and religious groups or indeed to decide that they should be waived.

Some churches fear that disproportionate and costly conditions may be attached to licences. However, under the Bill all licensing authorities would be required to have regard to guidance issued by the Secretary of State. And it is intended that this will make clear that it would be wholly inappropriate to attach disproportionate conditions to licences affecting churches and other charitable institutions.



Yours sincerely,
KIM HOWELLS,
Department for Culture,
Media and Sport,
2-4 Cockspur Street, SW1Y 5DH

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 30 Nov 02 - 10:37 AM

This from Howard Jones

There is a letter in today's "Times" from Dr Howells, responding to earlier letters from myself and others. He trots out the usual reponse that "impromptu" music making will not be affected, and puts forward a superficially reasonable case that local residents have a right to make their views known. This is of course undermined by the exemption for recorded music and TV, and fails to address why live music should not neverthelss be permitted unless it is shown to be causing problems with noise or disturbance.

Regards,

Howard Jones

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: GUEST,noddy
Date: 29 Nov 02 - 11:07 AM

In a recent interview the man himself said that churches would have to have a licence to hold musical events/performances but would be exempt if their was a religious context/content.

Why dont we declare that folk music is of religious significance and get round the licence that way. IE all folk session are religious gatherings ,after all we are free to express our reigion NO MATTER WHICH IT IS.
The alternative is at each and every session you do a hymn .

I am certain that many tunes are of religious origins anyway.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 28 Nov 02 - 02:50 PM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/h2/h2.cgi?state=threads&board=today.day&

The above link is to the Radio 4 'TODAY' progamme message board. Where there are some comments on Dr Howells's performance and where you can contribute........

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Nov 02 - 05:28 AM

There was a definite obscurity about how he spoke, he seems to be trying to obtain as much revenue as possible through the new license, and be as vague as possible as to who should pay it ,and who might be given exemption. He seemed to pooh-pooh the idea of small acoustic ensembles being outlawed, choirs or sessions, and yet does not state definitively how and who will decide on what is allowed. As a politician he is keeping all his options open, he may yet persuade many pubs and churches to pay their fee, when it may not be neccessary. The government needs as much extra revenue as it can get at present.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 28 Nov 02 - 05:16 AM

Click on the 'Baseball cap' item, Dr Howells quite pathetic performance was on after.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 28 Nov 02 - 04:58 AM

When I on the item, all I get is the 'bugging in Iraq' story? HELP!

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: Jeanie
Date: 28 Nov 02 - 04:48 AM

You can listen to it here
Good job they record it - admittedly I was half asleep when I heard it this morning, but he made the whole situation as clear as mud !

- jeanie

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 28 Nov 02 - 04:33 AM

He was talking about how the new pel rules will affect churches etc.
Everthing broadcast on radio 4 is kept online for at least a week, for anyone that missed it to listen to, sorry i don't know the website address, but hopefully someone else will.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: GUEST,Richard Bridge (cookie and format C)
Date: 28 Nov 02 - 04:24 AM

John, I missed it.

WHat did he say or is there a link to it on a BBC site somewhere?

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 28 Nov 02 - 02:53 AM

mr howells is been interviewed on BBC Radio 4 about PEL stuff Now.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 06:57 AM

Why do we need an ANNUAL Turner prize when every year we have the same exhibits, each one titled "The Emperor's New Clothes".

*Smiles*

On that subject, I wrote a letter containing the following to Dr Howells (via my MP, on 5th August. He has still to reply.

Summary.
I am reminded of the tale of the Emperor's New Clothes. On discovery, which option is the sillier? To continue to strut about naked, or to try and recover some dignity, put some clothes on and try to really improve an unfortunate situation for everyone? Dr Howells may find that if he stopped dismissing every genuine concern and sensible suggestion that is made to him, or stopped using these as an excuse for a light hearted comment, he may find some support, rather than continued to be attacked on all fronts. Many supporters of this Government, who trusted that this reform would address the many difficulties presented by the outdated concept and enforcement of blanket licensing of all but, only live music making, feel their trust was misplaced.

Subject: RE: kim howells does it again
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 02:03 AM

I do agree that the 2 in a bar exemption is crazy, and always has been, but why use a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Acoustic music simply cannot be accused of being a public niusance - whilst in the Ministers own words amplified music most certainly can be

Amplified music can be problem but there are already ways and means of dealing with excessive noise. There must be as all noise does not arise from music. To claim that advanced official permission is required for all and only live music making and that this licensing is the only control is just bogus.

When supersonic airliners were introduced, they were noisy and controls were introduced to limit the problem this presented to the public. I do not think that anyone seriously suggested that these control measures should be introduced to conventional airliners.