Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: DMcG
Date: 07 Feb 03 - 09:44 AM

It isn't (directly) up to Howells whether he accepts such an amendment. it will be voted on in the Lords who decide whether they accept it or not. It will then be up to Howells to convince the House of Commons to re-instate the clause as was, or to come up with some alternative.

So our lobbying of MPs needs to be kept up, especially if any of these amendments are passed.

(The amendments by Lord Beaumont of Whitley would be even more benefical to the cause than the one quoted above, as they would delete music, plays and dance entirely from regulation under the bill as I read them.)

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: IanC
Date: 07 Feb 03 - 09:53 AM

ET

Amendments which just exempt or remove music could be quite a nuisance ... I, for one wouldn't be too happy with them.

I sword dance and do mumming plays too, and I can't see any reason for removing music and not other activities.

Lord Beaumont of Whitley's amendment decimates the list of things that have to be considered licensed entertainment, so I think it would be best to throw all our weight behind that one.

:-)

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 05:16 AM

Any comments on Clause 174?

Clause 174 confers on an 'authorised person', the right to use reasonable force to enter premises in order to establish whether any music-making is being, or is about to be, carried under an authorisation.

Will be seeing an Elliot Ness style group of 'Untouchables' smashing down pub doors at the sound of, and in the seach for any unlicensed pianos?

This music making is a real problem, that must be stamped out at all cost................

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 05:25 AM

68,529................

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: ET
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 12:07 PM

Yes. I think the situation is that if the Lords votes for an amendment its up to the bill sponsor to try to get the commons to reverse it, which Howells may well do. Therefore MPs need either to vote the amendment through or add amendments of there own.

Stand by with tape recorders attached to radio 1 from 8 pm Monday.

PS. The effects of this bill are gradually becoming better known. In the letters column of the Yorkshire post today someone had written - how can requiring a licence better promote live music in this country and the removal of the restriction on secular music in church was not a matter for celebration - who but a madman would ever have wanted such a licence in the first place.

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: ET
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 04:08 AM

Licensing Bill – Making Tony and Cheri criminals.

Did anyone see "Trust me, I'm a politician" on BBC 2 Saturday night.   In the middle of it Tony and Cheri Blair committed what will become a most serious criminal offence. They were singing Christmas Carols accompanied by a number of infant children, playing fiddles, flutes and that most dangerous of weapons, the clarinet (dangerous because when the written note C is played it sounds B flat thus confounding Jobsworth from the Town Hall).

Moreover there were live cables threaded through these children (six months says Kim Howells, Culture Secretary).   Even if they had given the required notice to the Town Hall and Met Police and paid their £20, they would still deserve six months in prison because the audience must have exceeded the maximum the Licensing Bill will allow which is 499.

The good news is that if he keeps his nose clean he will be out in 3 months, by which time Prescott will have been in charge for only that time, and only half of Southern England will have been concreted over.

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 05:12 AM

'Things can only get better'.................

Is there any chance of Mrs Blair explaining Human Rights legislation to her husband?

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 08:34 AM

That amendment ET posted - they do seem to go in for needless complication, don't they? Amending that part of the Bill is very tricky, because they worry about putting in unintended loopholes.

It'd be far easier, and less "risky", to write in one or two specific exemptions in the exemptions section. (Part 2 of Schedule 1 of the Bill.)

I've suggested "The provision of any entertainment or entertainment facilities or participation in such activities where the primary purpose is for the mutual enjoyment of performers is not to be regarded as the provision of regulated entertainment for the purposes of this Act."

That would cover sessions and singarounds and Morris Dancers and Mummers and so forth. And it would bring the Bill into line with Kim Howells guarantee on the Mike Harding show (Radio2 July 17th 2002) that "As long as money isn't changing hands then there's no reason why they should have to have a licence.

Another exemption would be needed if the paid pub gigs were to be protected - maybe an extended two-in-a-bar but with specific amplification limits. Maybe "The provision of any entertainment or entertainment facilities or participation in such activities where no more than three performers are involved at any time, is not to be regarded as the provision of regulated entertainment for the purposes of this Act unless excessive amplification is used." That would leave the definition of excessive amplification to be determined in practice, with the courts having the last word.

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 10:01 AM

69,012..................

Tessa Jowell was on Radio 3's Music Matters today. An account of it can be found on the 'News Blackout' thread. They do not seem to have yet rigged up where you can listen to what was said on the show.

You can contibute to their message board on the subject of licensing on the following. It may certainly help for future coverage, if the show's producers can see a lot of input there.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/h2/h2.cgi?state=threads&board=radio3.musmatt&

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 07:57 AM

69,538..................

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 01:01 PM

See the latest (good news) on the following thread.

Human Rights Committee AGREES PEL

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: ET
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 04:02 PM

Just listened to Howells on Radio 1. Didn't listen to all of it but heard him say "in my 14 years as an MP I have never had a complaint about acoustic music, folk or similar but plenty about piped music and amplified music. What I want is construction not criticism. In answer to the questioner "I am willing to think again about acoustic music". (to listen to all he was saying I would have had to listen to 4 hours of hip hop - maybe someone will and record full transcript.

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: Alice
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 11:14 PM

69,969

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 05:37 AM

70,044................

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 07:50 AM

Since typing these out, from Howells and Jowell, I am absolutely sure that I know how to spell the words 'absolutely sure'. I am not sure if I am absolutely sure of anything else..........

Tessa Jowell talking earlier that week, on BBC Radio 3's Music Matters. Broadcast 09 February 2003.

You've had some fairly bad publicity recently over the Licensing Bill, which there is a petition up, with 67,000 signatures on it, from people who believe that, this is the licensing of public entertainment section of the Bill, who believe that really amateur music making, or casual music making is being squeezed out, this is a related question of course to the widening of access, do you accept that?.

TJ The campaign run by the Musician's Union has err been extraordinarily successful in attributing consequences that err will not transpire as a matter of fact.

But that's alright isn't it to run a campaign?

TK Of course it is, and we think it is a campaign of misinformation, they think it is campaign that will raise a tremendous amount of popular hostility to this legislation.

Were are absolutely determined that this promotes music, live music in pubs and other you know restaurants and bars, you know the whole range of places in which music now takes place. Will not limit it, and err I'm prepared to look very carefully at all the fine print to make sure that it is made easier, not more difficult.

The licenses will be cheaper, it will be easier to apply for a licence. So many of the bureaucratic obstacles that people face at the moment will change under the new legislation. But I think that what everybody has got to understand is that, there is absolutely no question that Tessa Jowell and Kim Howells got in to the office one morning and said, I know what we've got to do today. We are basically going to shut down music in pubs and clubs up and down the country. It is absolute nonsense.

I mean the thing about music is that it is such a fluid, casual kind of activity….

TK Of course…..

That you're legislating against it, in effect?

TJ No I don't think that's the case. And what I certainly don't want to see is a situation where six people are sitting around in a pub and they start singing together or somebody has guitar and they start singing and they are stopped because they haven't got a licence, I mean that would be patently ridiculous.

Its wonderful when music is made in that kind of spontaneous way, and yes I'm going to make absolutely sure, as is Kim Howells that the legislation supports, rather than undermines.

Do you foresee altering or there being any alterations in this?

TJ Well, we are at the beginning err, or we are half way through scrutiny in the Lords and then the Bill will come to the Commons around about Easter. And err certainly we will take the debate very seriously indeed and the whole purpose of Paliamentary democracy is to improve legislation. If it can be improved and if the evidence is that err a particular amendment will make it better. But everybody should be absolutely clear that our objective is to ensure that live music in pubs, flourishes.

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 10:28 AM

Thanks for doing that Shambles. That interviewer did quite a good job. In black and white, I'd read it as sounding very much as if a concession on sessions in pubs could actually be on the way.

Which means it's time to keep sending in nagging letters and getting people to sign petitions and so forth. For one thing they could well back off from accepting the right kind of amendment - and there are other things wrong with the bill as well, especially the risk to pub gigs generally. And of course Morris Dancers and such.

Nice letter in the Guardian today commenting on the one by Attila the Stockbroker ( a former Harlow man) the other day:

What a pity Attila the Stockbroker (Letters, February 8) sneers at his allies while attacking the licensing bill. Why dismiss the anger of traditional musicians and dancers as "whining"? Does he imagine he's the only one planning more than just petitions? He might one day be glad of friends with big sticks.
JE Howard
Bedford

And here is what Atila had written:

· No idea what my wife has sent to you, but can I take the opportunity to add my own favourite Half Man Half Biscuit lyric: When I had my loft converted back into a loft, the neighbours came around and scoffed and called me retro.

I've organised about five gigs for them, but now New Labour has managed to come up with yet another piece of legislation which even the most rightwing Tory would be proud of. They want all live music to be subject to a licence - a direct attack on dissident grassroots culture and confirmation that in the ideal New Labour world everyone is a TV-gawking passive consumer vegetable devoid of an original or independent thought.

Widescreen TV transmissions in pubs to hundreds won't be affected though, 'cos that would upset New Labour's friend, Rupert. Unbelievable! I can only make an appropriate response:

OFF LICENCE!
(for Kim Howells)
Rupert Murdoch, that's your "culture"
Tellytubby corporate state
Widescreen god won't need a licence -
He got you elected, mate!
Thousand Morris dancers whining
With petitions so polite
Some of us aren't whingeing folkies
And you've got yourself a fight!
Sky TV New Labour Tory
Mainstream dullard business bores
So come on, arrest Attila -
Cos I'll flout your stupid laws!
Poems and songs don't need a licence.
Never have and never will.
I'm here in your face, Kim Howells -
Tearing up your licence bill!

Attila the Stockbroker
Southwick, W Sussex

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 01:05 PM

Roger, can you post or post links here to the standard 3-page letter to MPs and the standard DCMS 12 page blurb.

I have just finished the Performer-Lawyer Group response to these but it will help people to be able to see them all at once - if I quoted the other two it woudl have doubled the length of mine.

Warning, my reply is 19 pages of legalese.

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 02:21 PM

http://www.does4you.co.uk/REPLY.htm

The above link is to the requested documents, on Molly and Terry's site. Perhaps they would host the Performer - Lawyer Group response there as well?

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 03:45 PM

71,056......................

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 05:04 PM

The Western Morning News is running a fine local campaign.

http://www.thisisdevon.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=116762&command=newPage

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 05:22 PM

The thing is, listening to Tessa Jowell and reading the transcript, there's an interesting difference between the "promise" Kim Howells made back in July, that for sessions and singarounds there would be no need at all for any kind of licence to be in place, "so long as money isn't changing hands", and what she said.

This time what's supposed to be protected, if she were to be trusted to follow through, would be "a situation where six people are sitting around in a pub and they start singing together or somebody has a guitar and they start singing".

Which, when you think of it doesn't sound like the same thing at all as a normal singaround or session, where people have arranged to get together on a regular basis, and it's open to others to come along and join in.

I'd say there definitely seems to be an indication that some kinds of concessions could be in the pipeline. However they could be well short of anything we'd want. They could in fact fall in line with Tessa Jowell's remarks, but not even extend as far as what Kim Howells promised (falsely it seems) to deliver. (71109 signatures now.)

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 05:57 PM

Thank you Roger.

Mega-email about to go out.

Kent on Sunday is stirring it up too.

Also BBC Radio Kent have me on at about 7.40 tomorrow (Thursday) morning. 96.7fm, Kent, UK. Don't know about internet radio.

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 06:03 PM

I think from listening to Tessa Jowell, that unlike Howells, she really believed what she said.....So it may well be worth while writing directly to her, and trying to explain what actually happens in sessions and such like.....Nothing to lose by trying, and they may well be more prepared to listen now?

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 06:43 PM

Isn't the etiquette of these things supposed to be that we write to our own MPs and ask them to forward the comments on?

Just to be on the safe side I'd suggest doing it both ways.

I agreed she sounded more sincere than Kim Howells. Of course that might be she is just better at sounding sincere. However my feeling is that this is a cockup rather than anything.

Having failed to consult with the right people over this, because the whole focus of the Bill was on the booze side of it, they found themselves with a Bill that was fatally flawed. And most politicians don't seem to have a reverse gear.

So sending her helpful sugestions for ways of getting out of this mess with minimum embarassment makes sense. What is needed are clarifications in the bill that will make it clear that all the dreadful things we have been worried about do not happen, and everyone is happy and says what a good job that Tessa Jowell is doing (and so for that matter is that card Kim Howells with his winning Welsh ways...)

I'll even write a song saying that if they deliver!

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: ET
Date: 13 Feb 03 - 05:01 PM

Having ceased to get a response to e-mails I have now tried snail mail to Howells - thus (sorry if its a bit wordy)

Attention of Dr Kim Howells.

An open, from the heart letter written as an amateur musician, not a lawyer.


Let me be constructive about music issues.   I work in the law and have done so all my working life (38 years now).

I am a law abiding citizen and my hobbies are not considered by me, or anyone I know, to be dangerous or offensive. I know you have said that the maximum penalty would be reserved by Magistrates to those who endanger health and safety. From my background I understand this well, but maximum penalties, and statutes with only one penalty, are also indicative of Parliaments view of the seriousness of offences. Even if I am to be accused only of playing a musical instrument in an unlicensed premises I have no wish to have to exercise a defence of due diligence, since prosecution alone would be disastrous in my employment, let alone conviction.

I would wish to explain the concern of myself, the thirty or forty musicians I know well and the thousands who express themselves through a musicians web site.

My hobby is music. I am not particularly good, indeed most of my friends play better but nonetheless I have a passion for playing. I play only acoustic instruments. I play mainly in a local pub, which has a PEL. The landlord has spent thousands on compliance with local authority requirements about crash bars, toilets etc. He has done this because he can afford it, has a passion for music and encourages players. He says that since we play for our own amusement in the main, and also for his pleasure, that the locals neither mind nor care, it adds nothing to his profits.

Playing at other pubs, with PELs, I find that when we "folkies" are playing at our best, sounds that to me are a delight, nonetheless many patrons do not even look our way, just walk in and to the bar.   This is because they are not disturbed by us, not offended, and don't care. Often we play in pubs in one small room, and in adjoining rooms there may be darts matches, pool or juke boxes. The only disturbance is to us from juke boxes. In 20 years playing I have never known a complaint from others in the pub. Occasionally enthusiastic applause, mainly indifference.

If a landlord thought we were putting off others and reducing his trade it would not be lack of a licence that ended our playing, it would be his decision.

I also play in folk festivals. They are often sponsored heavily by Local Authorities, who, on festival week, follow Home Office Guidelines and do not enforce the two in a bar rule, because they want to and do, attract many tourists to their town. Some authorities follow this philosophy throughout the year, others enforce the two in a bar rule with a rod of iron and then waive it for festival weeks. They are not particularly popular as you may imagine.


Your bill has cause tremendous anxiety for amateur musicians. We hoped the hated 2 in a bar rule, which you agree is a nonsense, would go. But not to be replaced with a none in a bar rule. We all know that local authorities, well meaning or otherwise, follow the dictates of their insurers and take no risks.   They assume all music is the same, all audiences are the same, with a potential for trouble, overcrowding etc. This is simply not so.

I noted that you said on the radio the other night you had never heard of a complaint of noise or trouble from acoustic music. I neither. Its not that such music is bland, it can be passionate, but it needs listening to and most of those who are members of the "yob culture" would not be seen dead listening to such.

So why are we worried. It is not paranoia or misinformation by the musicians union I assure you. It is because of the provisions of the bill.   If a landlord "ticks your music box" and adds acoustic music only, what will that mean to people living in the vicinity? They will only see the word music and think of thumps in the late night, walls vibrating etc and object. And if they do, or even if the landlord thinks they will object, he will not tick this box.    Landlords know, and all those who play know, that even with 20 players in a session, playing a fast Irish Jig, with Irish Drums (bodrhans) it is virtually impossible for the sound to penetrate the walls. There is none of the hideous bass thumps of amplified recorded music.

And also, given the "light touch" notice of an event elsewhere, there are obvious problems. Premises are defined as "any place" and such notice relates to events attracting crowds of less than 500.   But such an event may be, at festival time, every day of the week in a market square. What sort of "premise" is that. And how big is the audience? How far out do you count?

And would not your bill kill of busking? They play usually in a street for money. Is that not a "place". How can they know the size of a crowd? Would a local authority give then occasional permissions? Even if the fee was "only £20" they would be unlikely to raise that sum in collections. I think you have said that they can enliven many a dark corner. Would these stay dark?

Consider also your "culture" hat.   I have just read the "Rough" Guide to Ireland. In it every place has described its "Traditional Music Pub". It talks of continental visitors coming year after year for the music.   I have several Irish friends. They say that there is never any trouble in music pubs there but there would be if the Irish Government tried to license it.


I cannot think where you get the idea that acoustic music is not necessarily free of noise. At its very worst it might annoy others in the pub, but rest assured any landlord would kick it out if he thought it was affecting trade.   I understand you like Jazz. I know of several pubs that put on Jazz nights. These are the noisiest of acoustic instruments (saxes etc) but they cannot be heard outside the premises.   But I know of many pubs in my local city that only play recorded music but it echoes down the street. I have even attended symphony concerts in a local City Hall, which, in quieter passages are interrupted by the thump thump from a pub 500 yards away playing amplified pre recorded music.


AM I BEING CONSTRUCTIVE?

I hope so. I ask you to consider the amendments in the Lords and adopt them. There would be absolutely no public noise or disturbance issues if acoustic music were exempt.

If I am leaving amplified life music exposed, then so be it. Impose conditions that protect the public from unlicensed and unsafe raves in fields, but allow properly organised and safety conscious amplified music to continue with proper licences.

If you do this you will remove anxiety from folk, jazz, buskers, players of medieval music, Salvation Army Players, organisers and players in folk and jazz festivals. The near 65,000 people who have signed the e-petition will be mightily relieved.

You will be able to meet some human rights issues with ease and concentrate on selling this legislation for what it will then become, a true de-regulation measure.

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Feb 03 - 05:15 PM

I thnk that's the right tone to take, ET. Patient and thorough, and avoiding sarcasm or irony. Ignoring the insults and the sneers, taking him at his word when he says he wants advice.

Just hope he reads it.

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: Mr Happy
Date: 14 Feb 03 - 05:53 AM

71669 Total Signatures!

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Feb 03 - 04:23 PM

This from Hamish Birchall - For circulation

On Sunday 9 February, during an interview on 'Music Matters' for BBC Radio 3, Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell said the Musicians' Union Licensing Bill campaign was a 'campaign of misinformation'. This was, of course, a day before the Joint Committee on Human Rights published its report vindicating MU concerns. The Committee concluded that the 'blanket licensing regime' proposed in the Bill carries a 'significant risk' of infringing people's right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention.

The MU will respond to the Culture Secretary's allegation on this Sunday's edition of BBC R3's Music Matters, starting at 12.15pm (16 Feb).

The growing body of legal opinion in support of the MU analysis of the Bill's implications includes a specialist licensing QC. In additions, the Performer-Lawyer group, which also shares MU concerns, has published a 19-page dissection of the 24-point DCMS document published last month, concluding that much of the DCMS analysis is either inaccurate or misleading. It is available on: www.does4you.co.uk

My own annotated version of the DCMS document on the MU site:
http://www.musiciansunion.org.uk/articles/dcms_issues01.shtml

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Feb 03 - 01:07 AM

If you are in any doubt about the effect of Bill's wording or you wish to inform your MP or media, then please have a look at the above sites, in particular at Richard Bridge's (long but) vital rebuttal of the claims for the Bill made by the DCMS.

A PDF version of this letter to his MP, can be found on the following site. http://www.adac-records.co.uk/licensing-bill/kim-howells/

72,013...........................

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Feb 03 - 06:28 AM

Please circulate.

Having now read Richard's fine document, can I suggest a visit to the following site, http://www.adac-records.co.uk/licensing-bill/kim-howells/ where you can print both the leaflet from the DCMS and the Performer-Lawyer Group's response, and that both are sent to your MP as a matter of some urgency?

It is a lot of paper but it is vital that MPs, many of who may have swallowed the 'spin', are made aware of quite how poor the words of this Bill are. This document will demonstrate to MPs the size of the problem that is facing them now and what future legal problems they/we will face, if the Bill is passed.

We are only going to get this one chance. We really must make to most of it.

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: ET
Date: 15 Feb 03 - 12:54 PM

Have read this guidance. Madness.   On page 46 it says "Temporary Events requiring premises licence - para 6.75 - duration - limited to events lasting 73 hours.
Same page para 6.77 - Temporary events may range from relatively small local events, like fairs, which last four or five days, to major pop festivals lasting only 1 day.

Presumably all week long festivals will now be limited to 3 days and Hull and Nottingham Fairs, which last a week, will be limited to 3 days. Unless Howells has the power to change time in the act?

There is little to encourage anyone that he cares about music in these regulations. I am surprised it doesn't introduce a music police force, with a long black coat and red peaked hat, equipped with metronome, whilst and bag of fixed penalty notices.

Happy Valentine

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Feb 03 - 01:53 PM

http://www.culture.gov.uk/new_responsibilities/guidance_section177_licensing.pdf

The above link is to the DCMS Guidance (PDF), on their site, Eric refers to above.

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 16 Feb 03 - 05:57 PM

72,506................

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: Mr Happy
Date: 17 Feb 03 - 11:48 AM

72767 Total Signatures

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: ET
Date: 17 Feb 03 - 12:51 PM

Have sent this to my MP having read the draft "guidance".   I do think that as drafted providing pub sessions where for theenjoyment of the musicians and no "facilities" were provided there is a good chance that no licence would be required. Needs a careful look at the guidance which has no legal effect of course. Indoor sports need a licence and Howells says that they are "not played for the enterainment of spectators but for the private enjoyment of the participants (like sessions?) but he goes on "it is only when such games are staged for spectators, for example a darts championship compeition, that the activity would become licensable.

For music there is another clause about entertainment facilities such as a dance floor but none is usually provided at sessions I attend.!

============================================================


Licensing Darts in Pubs!

I enclose a couple of pages from the draft guide to the licensing bill issued by Mr Howells. I have no love of pub games but paragraph 6.6 requires a licence for an indoor sporting event. Para 6.9 makes it clear that if such a game is staged for spectators such as a darts championship competition, is a licence required. Failure to have same - £20,000 and or 6 months.   He also refers to pool, table tennis and billiards!

This illustrates the nonsense. Darts played for the pleasure of the darts team – no licence. (presumably acoustic music played for the pleasure of the musicians the same – no facilities provided such as a stage etc (see para 6.7) but if for darts or music played for the entertainment of spectators (his word, the act says audience) then a licence is required!

What absolute nonsense. No wonder he himself is confused and said on the radio once that pubs sessions played for the pleasure of the musicians was not licensable and later said it was.

I would write to him direct but I fear he has ceased to respond. Would you be so kind as to copy this to your colleague, the shadow minister for culture?

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Feb 03 - 01:14 PM

Pub games

6.9 Games commonly played in pubs and clubs and social and youth clubs like pool, darts, table tennis and billiards may fall within the definition of indoor sports in Schedule 1, but normally they would not be played for entertainment of spectators but for the private enjoyment of the participants. As such they are not regulated entertainment, and the facilities provided (even if a pub provides them for profit) do not fall within the limited list of entertainment facilities in the Schedule.

It is only when such games are staged for spectators, for example, a darts championship competition that the activity would become licensable.

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Feb 03 - 01:44 PM

This also from the DCMS.

        Entertainment facilities are defined by the Bill as facilities for enabling persons to take part in music making, dancing or similar entertainment, for the purpose of being entertained. An antique piano in a pub that was only provided for decorative effect would not give rise to the need for a licence. And a licence would not be required if the pub operator did not allow the public to play it. A licence would only be required if it was used to entertain people at the premises or by people on the premises to entertain themselves.

So a pub can even charge for provding darts or a cue and even then it is not licensable. But the mere provision of a playable piano is.............Perfectly logical this.

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: Mr Happy
Date: 17 Feb 03 - 10:07 PM

but the pianists could be entertaining himself & would therefore need a licence- if he was wearing ear-muffs no licence needed?

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: Mr Happy
Date: 17 Feb 03 - 10:19 PM

72940 Total Signatures

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: ET
Date: 18 Feb 03 - 11:44 AM

Below is an extract from 11 files of Government Amendments (received from the Musicians/Performing Lawyers Group. I think this looks like good news but there are 11 such files and many are complex.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 110, line 32, at end insert—
        "Unamplified music incidental to certain other activities
(1)              The provision of entertainment consisting of the performance of live music (and not comprising or including the playing of recorded music) is not to be regarded as the provision of regulated entertainment for the purposes of this Act to the extent that the conditions specified in sub-paragraph (2) are satisfied and to the extent that it is incidental to some other activity that is not itself—
(a)         entertainment of a description falling within paragraph 2, or
(b)         the provision of entertainment facilities.
(2)              The conditions referred to in sub-paragraph (1) are that—
(a)         the other activity referred to in sub-paragraph (1) is the subject of, and is undertaken in accordance with, a licence granted under this Act;
(b)         the live music being performed is not provided in whole or part by means of, or with the assistance of, electrical or electronic amplification, or made more readily audible by such amplification either in the place where the performance is occurring or in any other place."
        Schedule 6
        THE BARONESS BUSCOMBETHE LORD LUKE


Page 111, line 32, at end insert—
        "but excludes traditional pub games such as skittles, darts, billiards, snooker, pool or table football"

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: ET
Date: 18 Feb 03 - 11:49 AM

Also received this as Government Amendments. B


AMENDMENTS
TO BE MOVED
ON REPORT

        Schedule 1
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 108, line 32, leave out from "of" to ", and" in line 33 and insert—
"(i)         any person concerned in the organisation or management of that entertainment, or
(ii)         any person concerned in the organisation or management of those facilities who is also concerned in the organisation or management of the entertainment within paragraph 3(2) in which those facilities enable persons to take part"
        Page 108, line 37, at end insert—
"(   )         For the purposes of sub-paragraph (4)(a), where the entertainment consists of the peformance of live music or the playing of recorded music, a person performing or playing the music is not concerned in the organisation or management of the entertainment by reason only that he does one or more of the following—
(a)         chooses the music to be performed or played,
(b)         determines the manner in which he performs or plays it,
(c)         provides any facilities for the purposes of his performance or playing of the music."
        Clause 7
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 4, line 44, at end insert—
"(   )         In a case where an authority exercises its power under subsection (5)(b), its licensing committee must (unless the matter is urgent) consider any report of any of the authority's other committees with respect to the matter before discharging the function concerned."
        Clause 13
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 8, line 30, at end insert—
"(   )         the local planning authority within the meaning given by the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (c. 8) for any area in which the premises are situated,"
        Clause 17
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 11, line 9, leave out "Regulations may" and insert "The Secretary of State must by regulations"
        Clause 29
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 16, line 35, leave out "power to make regulations under" and insert "duty to make regulations imposed on the Secretary of State by"
        Page 16, line 38, after "made" insert "under section 17(5)(a)"
        Clause 33
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 19, line 15, leave out "power to make regulations under" and insert "duty to make regulations imposed on the Secretary of State by"
        Clause 50
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 29, line 30, leave out "Regulations under this section may" and insert "The Secretary of State must by regulations under this section"
        Clause 68
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 39, line 38, at end insert—
"(   )         the local planning authority within the meaning given by the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (c. 8) for any area in which the premises are situated,"
        Clause 70
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 41, line 4, leave out "Regulations may" and insert "The Secretary of State must by regulations"
        Clause 71
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 41, line 26, leave out from "application" to end of line 28
        Page 41, line 40, leave out from "objectives" to end of line 42
        Clause 72
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Leave out Clause 72
        Clause 82
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 46, line 23, leave out "power to make regulations under" and insert "duty to make regulations imposed on the Secretary of State by"
        Clause 83
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 47, line 17, leave out subsection (7)
        Clause 85
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 48, line 19, leave out "Regulations under this section may" and insert "The Secretary of State must by regulations under this section"
        Clause 86
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 49, line 32, leave out subsection (5)
        Schedule 4
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 116, line 38, at end insert—
".         An offence under any of the following provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (c. 48)—
(a)         section 107(1)(d)(iii) (public exhibition in the course of a business of article infringing copyright);
(b)         section 198(2) (broadcast etc. of recording of performance made without sufficient consent);
(c)         section 297(1) (fraudulent reception of transmission);
(d)         section 297A(1) (supply etc. of unauthorised decoder)."
        Clause 130
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 72, line 7, leave out from "apply," to "or" in line 9
        Clause 134
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 74, line 9, at end insert—
"(1A)         Where the licensable activity in question is the provision of regulated entertainment, a person does not commit an offence under this section if his only involvement in the provision of the entertainment is that he—
(a)         performs in a play,
(b)         participates as a sportsman in an indoor sporting event,
(c)         boxes or wrestles in a boxing or wrestling entertainment,
(d)         performs live music,
(e)         plays recorded music,
(f)         performs dance, or
(g)         does something coming within pargraph 2(1)(h) of Schedule 1 (entertainment similar to music, dance, etc.).
(1B)         Subsection (1A) is to be construed in accordance with Part 3 of Schedule 1."
        Clause 137
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 75, line 12, leave out "section" and insert "subsection"
        Clause 164
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 89, line 34, leave out "Regulations may" and insert "The Secretary of State must by regulations"
        Clause 169
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 94, line 6, at end insert—
"(   )         Before making an order under this section, the Secretary of State must consult such persons as he considers appropriate."
        Clause 177
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 98, line 15, leave out subsection (1) and insert—
"(1)         The Secretary of State must issue guidance ("the licensing guidance") to licensing authorities on the discharge of their functions under this Act.
(1A)         But the Secretary of State may not issue the licensing guidance unless a draft of it has been laid before, and approved by resolution of, each House of Parliament.
(1B)         The Secretary of State may, from time to time, revise the licensing guidance.
(1C)         A revised version of the licensing guidance does not come into force until the Secretary of State lays it before Parliament.
(1D)         Where either House, before the end of the period of 40 days beginning with the day on which a revised version of the licensing guidance is laid before it, by resolution disapproves that version—
(a)         the Secretary of State must, under subsection (1B), make such further revisions to the licensing guidance as appear to him to be required in the circumstances, and
(b)         before the end of the period of 40 days beginning with the date on which the resolution is made, lay a further revised version of the licensing guidance before Parliament.
(1E)         In reckoning any period of 40 days for the purpose of subsection (1D), no account is to be taken of any time during which—
(a)         Parliament is dissolved or prorogued, or
(b)         both Houses are adjourned for more than four days."
        Clause 178
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 98, line 28, at end insert ";
(   )         prescribe the period within which an application, in relation to which a hearing has been held, must be determined or any other step in the procedure must be taken"
        Schedule 8
        THE BARONESS BLACKSTONE
        Page 164, line 9, leave out from first "and" to "in" in line 10 and insert "section 73 (prohibited conditions in club premises certificates) applies"
        Page 164, line 14, leave out "sections 72 and" and insert "section"
        Page 168, line 15, leave out "1964 Act" and insert "Licensing Act 1964 (c. 26)"

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: ET
Date: 18 Feb 03 - 11:52 AM

Please look at this. It is interesting


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/2775821.stm

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: Mr Happy
Date: 18 Feb 03 - 12:01 PM

ET,

yes very interesting- but can we trust them i wonder?

prob t blair doesn't need any more knock downs in his popularity poll, with all the folkies & other all dancing,singing artistes!

so he's told jowls & howls [govt comedy duo] to clean up their act!!

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: IanC
Date: 18 Feb 03 - 12:14 PM

Looking at Baroness Blackstone's (official) amendments very briefly, it appears as though it's probably worse than it was before. It doesn't stop these things being illegal if not licensed, just decriminalises those who carry them out.

This means it's taken away our power to use civil disobedience as a weapon but still means the landlord of a pub will get into trouble. Pretty much back to the situation as before, but with the 2 in a bar exemption removed and other restrictions (like the pub piano one). It also doesn't seem to cope with things like advertised carol singing except to say that it's illegal but you won't get prosecuted for it.

An ambiguous law is always worse than a plain bad one.

Support Lord Whittle's amendments!!!

:-)

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: IanC
Date: 18 Feb 03 - 12:33 PM

Sorry ... I mean Lord Beaumont of Whitley's amendments (28th January).

:-)

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Feb 03 - 12:38 PM

73,145..................

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Feb 03 - 02:32 PM

Is this the one?

Clause 1

THE LORD BEAUMONT OF WHITLEY

Page 1, line 8, after "entertainment" insert "on controlled premises"
Clause 134

THE LORD BEAUMONT OF WHITLEY

Page 74, line 6, at end insert "covered"
Schedule 1

THE LORD BEAUMONT OF WHITLEY

Page 109, line 9, leave out paragraphs (a) and (b)
Page 109, line 13, leave out paragraphs (e) to (h)
Page 109, line 18, after "audience" insert "of more than 300 paying people"
Page 111, line 8, leave out "one" and insert "three"
Page 111, line 16, at end insert "excluding those shown on a television screen or projection of such a screen"
Page 111, line 32, at end insert—
   "but excludes traditional pub games such as skittles, darts, billiards, snooker, pool or table football"
Page 111, line 37, leave out from "Music" to end of line 38 and insert "means amplified instrumental music performed by more than two people"

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 18 Feb 03 - 02:43 PM

Blackstone is govt. Rest are not. My haste gave some a different impression. Sorry.

Blackstone almost solves the provate party problem. THer est are still problems.
Beaumont is unworkable (think about it, 300 people with amps in teh pub over the road from your house!!)

I have spent hours today on comments to other performer lawyers and one draft amendment inspired by Beaumont for Jazzers, but can everyone please write Howells and tell him Baroness Buscombe's acoustic exemption solves man y problems and by Howells own admission on Radio 1 (no compaints about acoustic music) on Monday does not harm any of teh licensing objective?

We desperately need someone witha good grasp of hte law and of Morris dancing practice to addres teh probelms for Morris dance.

Howells is also offereing to consult with almost everyone except the EFDSS about the guidelines. Why not them?

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: DMcG
Date: 18 Feb 03 - 04:28 PM

Beaumont is unworkable (think about it, 300 people with amps in teh pub over the road from your house!!)

Surely, Richard, even with the Beaumont amendments the 300 people could be stopped under the existing noise laws?

Subject: RE: Sign a E Petition to 10 Downing St PELs
From: IanC
Date: 19 Feb 03 - 04:43 AM

Thing is, the Beaumont amendment is the only thing that even attempts to address more than just music.

For reference about primarily non-musical activities:

Morris Dancers and Longsword dancers usually dance outside 2 or 3 pubs a night, every 2-3 weeks in summer.

Mummers usually do a once-a-year play inside 3-4 pubs on a single night

Rapper sword dancers dance inside 5-6 pubs a night, every 2-3 weeks in winter.

Nod doubt there are other groups, but these are the ones I have most to do with.

:-)