Licensing Bill 2003
You’ll all know of the changes in law, that have generally fucked up, our gatherings outside, Public order act CJA etc …….
Then there was the club licensing rules …… drugs etc and the ‘Barry Legg’ Act ………
And now, here comes the next one: The Licensing Bill 2003
This is a great overview
http://www.musiclovers.ukart.com/pels.htm
Local Government Association Info
http://www.lga.gov.uk/Briefing.asp?lsection=0&id=SXEF99-A7813934
http://www.lga.gov.uk/Briefing.asp?lsection=0&id=SXEF99-A7814395
Licensing Bill: Summary of key points
http://www.info4local.gov.uk/searchreport.asp?id=13063&frompage=subjects&subject=5
Licensing Bill: Ten archaic laws that will be repealed
http://www.info4local.gov.uk/searchreport.asp?id=13064&frompage=subjects&subject=5
Licensing Bill: Comparison – Existing and new
http://www.info4local.gov.uk/searchreport.asp?id=13065&frompage=subjects&subject=5
Licensing of Live Music in England and Wales
Carol singers will be criminals – without a licence – sign the petition!
http://www.wgma.org.uk/licensing.html
The “Blair Bans Morris” poster page
http://www.beerfordbury.com/BBTWTA/Banmorris.htm
THREAT TO LIVE MUSIC
The Government includes the Licensing Bill in its programme of legislation for the coming session and part of this bill relates to the issue of Public Entertainment Licences. Despite 233 MPs having signed David Heath’s Early Day Motion calling for the protection of live music, the proposed measures are draconian to say the least. Hamish Birchall is the advisor to the Musicians Union on public entertainment licensing reform. This is his analysis of the proposed legislation.
Licensing reform and live music
The broad aims of the Licensing Bill are to be welcomed, of course. Deregulation of opening times is likely to reduce binge-drinking, and alcohol-related crime and disorder. However, if all the provisions of this otherwise liberalising Bill were enacted, this would represent the biggest increase in licensing control of live music for over 100 years:
* 110,000 on-licensed premises in England and Wales would lose their automatic right to allow one or two musicians to work. A form of this limited exemption from licensing control dates back to at least 1899.
* Churches outside London would lose their licensing exemption for public concerts.
* Thousands of private events, hitherto exempt, become licensable if ‘for consideration and with a view to profit’.
* The same applies to any private performance raising money for charity.
* A new licensing criterion is introduced: the provision of ‘entertainment facilities’. This could mean professional rehearsal studios, broadcasting studios etc will be illegal unless first licensed.
* Musicians could be guilty of a criminal offence if they don’t check first that premises hold the appropriate authorisation for their performance.
* Likewise someone organising a karaoke night in a pub.
* Buskers similarly potential criminals – unless they perform under a licensing authorisation.
* Church bell ringing could be licensable.
* But… broadcast entertainment on satellite or terrestrial TV, or radio, is to be exempt from licensing under this Bill.
The licensing rationale, where live music is concerned, is essentially to prevent overcrowding and noise nuisance. The government claims their reforms will usher in a licensing regime fit for the 21st century. But surely 21st century planning, safety, noise and crime and disorder legislation can deal effectively with most of the problems associated with live music? Not according to Culture Minister Kim Howells. He says the swingeing increase in regulation is necessary because ‘one musician with modern amplification can make more noise than three without’.
Of course, it is true that amplification can make one musician louder than another playing without amplification. But that was true when the two performer exemption was introduced in 1961 and had been true for many years before that. The important question is: does live music present a serious problem for local authorities? Does it justify such an increase in control? The answer is no. The Noise Abatement Society has confirmed that over 80% of noise complaints about pubs are caused by noisy people outside the premises. The remaining percentage is mostly down to noisy recorded music or noisy machinery. In fact, while noisy bands can be a problem, complaints about live music are relatively rare.
In any case, local authorities have powerful legislation to tackle noise breakout from premises. All local authorities can seize noisy equipment, and they can serve anticipatory noise abatement notices. Camden used a noise abatement notice to close the West End musical Umoja earlier this year. One resident’s complaints were enough. And the police can close noisy pubs immediately for up to 24 hours. The trouble is, many complainants perceive the legislation as inadequate because their local authority doesn’t enforce it effectively.
It looks as if musicians are being made the scapegoat for a problem that is nothing to do with live music. Certainly abolition of the two-performer licensing exemption will do nothing to reduce noise from people outside premises. Rather late in the day, the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) has just commissioned a study into the noise nuisance potential of the licensing reforms – but the study won’t be completed until the Spring of 2003 at the earliest. A classic case of shutting the stable door…
The government says that standardising licensing fees, with no premium for entertainment, removes the disincentive to provide live music. This change is welcome. However, fees are only half the problem. The other half is the potential for unnecessary local authority licence conditions. Earlier this year, Kim Howells warned the Musicians’ Union that if it were to lobby for satellite TV to become a licensable entertainment, this would be ‘resisted robustly’ by the leisure industry. He did not say why, but the reasons are clear.
The industry does not believe government assurances that local authorities will adhere to published guidance over future licence conditions. They fear the cost implications of conditions such as monitored safe capacities, and CCTV. (Two years ago the Home Office warned all local authorities not to impose disproportionate conditions. Few, if any, took notice). Genuine 21st century reform for live music, particularly small-scale performance in pubs and bars, would see England and Wales brought into line with Scotland and Ireland, continental Europe.
Scotland is a good example because public safety and noise is regulated by UK-wide legislation. In that country a typical bar or pub can host live music automatically during permitted hours, provided the music is ancillary to the main business. In New York City, premises of capacity 200 or less are likewise free of a requirement to seek prior authorisation for live music. Noise breakout is strictly monitored by street patrols. In Germany, Finland and Denmark the provision of some live music is assumed when the equivalent of an on-licence is granted. In rural Ireland no permission is need for live music in a pub, and customers would think it very odd to suggest that it be a criminal offence unless first licensed.
The Musicians’ Union has argued for reform along Scottish lines for some time. But the government has rejected this option. Our campaign for more live music, particularly in small venues, is supported by the Arts Council, the Church of England, Equity, the English Folk Dance and Song Society and many others. The Union recognises that premises specialising in music, or music and dance (like nightclubs) need the additional controls that licensing provide. But if live music of all kinds is to thrive in small community venues like pubs, an automatic permission, within certain parameters, is essential. We should not treat all musicians as potential criminals. That doesn’t sit well with the participation and access agenda of the DCMS.
What you can do
You can write to your MP expressing your concerns at the following address:
House of Commons,
London SW1A 0AA
Sign the petition against the proposed legislation. You can either do so online at http://www.musiclovers.ukart.com or look out for a paper version of the same petition at your local club or session.
and
Some of us in England and Wales who hold the making of music important, rather badly need the active support of all those that care for music. Our Government has not listened to us, they may very well listen to the views of potential overseas tourists. Especially as the Bill in question is quite bizarrely coming from the Department of CULTURE, media and sport, which is the same department that deals with promoting TOURISM. It would be a great help if you could inform your media, of this discrimination of all (but only) LIVE music, taking place, not by the Taliban but in the ‘mother of all Parliaments’, it could prove most helpful and be much appreciated.
The Licensing Reform Bill can be found on the UK Parliamentary site. http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/pabills.htm
Government Minister Tessa Jowell, in the press release and at the launch of the Bill. “In short this is a Bill for the public, a Bill for industry and a Bill for commonsense.”
Can the introduction of measures in a Bill, that ‘can be argued’, such as the Schedule 1 definitions of what is ‘entertainment’- in a Bill we were all looking to finally settle such long-running arguments – really be described by the Minister in charge as “commonsense”? Schedule 1. Definitions of what is licensable – i.e. ‘entertainment’ that will be not be ‘permitted’ without the exact nature of the ‘entertainment’ specified in advance and official local authority permission being obtained. I’m sure that if you have looked at this it will all be perfectly clear now? SIGH..
I would also draw your attention to clause 134 (1)(a) of the main Bill, which will make criminal any musician who performs anywhere without first checking that the place is licensed/authorised for the performance. Clause 137 allows a defence of ‘due diligence’, but basically it means that if the musician doesn’t check first he/she could face heavy fines and a jail sentence.
The following from Hamish Birchall Musicians’ Union adviser – public entertainment licensing reform 020 7267 7700, 07973 519245
Yesterday the government published the Licensing Bill which, if enacted, would make criminal the provision of most live music in England and Wales, unless first licensed. As predicted, broadcast entertainment on satellite or terrestrial TV is exempt i.e. MTV. The proposals represent the most significant increase in live music licensing for over 100 years.
According to Culture Minister Kim Howells, this is necessary because ‘one musician with modern amplification can make more noise than three without’. But since most noise complaints are nothing to do with music (acoustic or amplified), and even one unamplified performer would become illegal unless licensed, this rationale doesn’t quite hang together.
Schedule 1, ‘Provision of Regulated Entertainment’, lists and defines what constitutes licensable live music and much more besides.
Temporary permissions are covered in Part 5.
Premises licences, which include the option for licensable entertainments, are dealt with in Part 3.
No fees have been published yet, but guidance notes available on the DCMS website repeat the estimates contained in the licensing White Paper of April 2000.
Neither the extensive media coverage or Parliamentary support for reform has influenced the small clique of senior civil servants and Ministers responsible for this legislation. Both the Musicians’ Union and the Arts Council argued forcibly against the huge increase in licensing control, and jointly submitted amendments to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) in the recent consultation on the draft legislation. But the DCMS rejected them. In that respect lobbying has failed. It may yet succeed, however, if sympathetic Lords support these amendments (the Bill is going first to the House of Lords).
All my efforts, those of the Arts Council working party, and those of supporting organisations, will now be focussed on this. In practical terms, this is what the Licensing Bill proposes for live music:
Pubs, bars, restaurants etc 110,000 licensed premises lose their automatic right to host one or two live musicians. A form of this licensing exemption can be traced back to 1899. Regular performance by even one musician, professional or amateur, amplified or unamplified, to be illegal without licensing permission.
Permission requires approval by police, fire service, environmental health dept, and local residents.
Local authority grants authorisation as part of ‘premises licence’ and may impose ‘necessary’ conditions (for public safety, crime and disorder, prevention of nuisance, and protection of children from harm).
If granted, the permission lasts for lifetime of business but may be revoked if noise/crime and disorder problems.
Licence fees to be standardised (at lower levels than now) and set centrally by Secretary of State. Fee to be no different if licensable entertainment provided.
If live music not authorised, live music to be illegal (save spontaneous renditions of Happy Birthday etc) – but see above -ed
Licence terms may be varied later if live music not chosen at outset. Variation process essentially the same as initial application (see above). A fee will be chargeable. Where live music not allowed under terms of premises licence, there is an option for up to 5 temporary permissions in a year, granted by a simple notification process (for a fee) provided under 500 people attend.
Private functions The distinction between public and private events is blurred. Until now most private gigs have been exempt from public entertainment licensing. Most gigs on public land have been exempt. This would no longer be the case. Many, if not most, performances in this context would become illegal unless licensed, either via the premises licence, a club premises certificate, or a temporary event notice. The wording of the Bill suggests that if a musician is hired to perform at a private event, this alone is sufficient to trigger the licensing requirement (this was hinted at in letters from Howells to MPs: ‘it is clear that if a performer is paid, then the performance is public’.)
Any hitherto private performance ‘with a view to raising money for charity’ to become illegal unless licensed.
Live music in private clubs no longer exempt.
Churches All public concerts in churches to become illegal unless licensed. This provision extends legislation that currently applies only in London to the rest of England and Wales. This is very strange, because the London legislation dates from 1963, while the outside London legislation dates from 1982. Music ‘for the purposes of, or for purposes incidental to a religious meeting or service’ is exempt.
New concept of ‘entertainment facilities’ as licensing criterion. This is another strange provision. It seems that providing ‘facilities for enabling persons to take part in entertainment’, such as making music and/or dancing, is now to be illegal unless licensed. It is a confusing part of the Bill, but my reading of this is that recording studios, rehearsal studios, or practice rooms may be caught. It might also include musical instruments, record decks, microphones, amplifiers, PAs etc etc. I am seeking clarification from licensing lawyers on this one.
Bandwagons exempt! Curiouser and curiouser: live music performed in, or presumably on, moving vehicles is exempt! Recorded music – limited exemption Recorded music is legal without being licensed ‘to the extent that it is incidental to some other activity which is not itself – (a) a description of entertainment falling within paragraph 2, or (b) the provision of entertainment facilities’. In other words, I think pub jukeboxes would be exempt, provided they weren’t next to a dance floor (but how do you define a dance floor???)
If you can find time to read the legislation, particularly Schedule 1, I would be very grateful for your comments.
Any musician lawyers out there: your input could be particularly valuable.
Roger Gall
Sign a petition at: http://www.musiclovers.ukart.com
A Musician’s Reaction
This Bill affects every performer, organiser, folk-dancer, singer & musician in the UK. You may think this bloke Roger (below) is being a bit extreme – in any case unlicenced jams & sing-arounds are illegal in many areas of England already. What upsets me a bit is that the strings are now being pulled very tight.
This new legislation will NOT STOP squat raves (recently in the news in the south-east)- those are illegal now, frequently involve a lot of property damage and are excellent places to buy skunk & E’s (it is alleged …). They take place unmolested because they are too big for police to break up.
What this law WILL do is to allow local councils to persecute folk clubs and stamp out jams & sing-arounds, free weekends and anything else that you have not given two weeks notice of and paid the right fee with the correct form in respect of.
The definition of entertainment you have to get permision for is now very wide – “… to any extent for members of the public ..” and there is a widely-drafted list of definitions in Schedule 1 paragraph 2. One ray of hope is that Lord’s Amendments tabled 2nd December seek remove religious and educational institutions from the overall definition, and plays, indoor sporting events and live music from the list – so someone’s taking this seriously.
I have been pulled up on my assertion that even children’s entertainers at a birthday party will need a licence. True, you couldn’t call this a “Play” any more that you would call a stand-up comic or after dinner speaker a “Play” – BUT performers frequently use and make music & dance – getting the kids to sing & dance is all part of the fun. There is a “entertainment of a similar nature” provision just in case there’s any doubt. Entertainers also play a “role” although I doubt if you could call what they do a Dramatic Piece, but on balance I stand by my opinion.
As to speakers and comics, I will accept that I’ve gone a bit over the top. It would take an effort of imagination to expand the definitions to fit them (but you never know) …..
If you feel strongly about this, please do write / mail to your MP NOW – also any of their Lordships that may appear relevant to you.
The draft Bill (PDF format) can be found at: http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld200203/ldbills/001/2003001.htm
