All Signed Up

[muninnhuginn]

To protest against the ludicrous (and probably puritanical) "Licensing of Live Music in England and Wales" bill at: Petition

Sadly, only UK signatures count.

Comments

how strange!

[prufrock.livejournal.com]

good grief - i'm probably lacking in sufficient knowledge of the context here, but whatever this is looks to be quite repressive. how did this proposed provision come into being, anyway - who is behind it and is apt to profit from it?

hm. it would seem that my country isn't the only one presently afflicted by governmental killjoys and blue-noses, at the very least... sorry to hear about this! pf.

Nanny States (UK- and US-Style)

[muninnhuginn]

The current situation is weird enough. In England (and hence probably Wales), but not in Scotland (and what the rules are in Northern Ireland, I know not!), pubs can have one or two live performers without obtaining any special licence for live music performance. Anything larger and a licence is required.
The proposed legislation originally sounded as if this situation would be liberalised. However, essentially the one/two performers rule is potentially going to be scrapped. The legislation also hits churches and church halls used for music entertainments, which in large parts of the country, as well as providing vital income for the churches concerned, are the only venues for both amateur and professional performances. So Scout gang shows, church carol concerts, etc. are potentially under threat as well. It stinks.
(Where karoake fits into all of this, either in the current or proposed legislation, I dunno. It'd be sad if it survived but all reall live performances disappeared.)
Sign of the times though. What with the city council in Edinburgh banning parents from videoing or photographing their children's nativity plays (fearful that paedophiles might use the footage for illicit purposes) and following the saga of the licencing of clubs in New York, I'm beginning to believe that the puritan killjoys are winning.

[Found the original info I got:

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:
a.. 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.
b.. Churches outside London would lose their licensing exemption for public concerts.
c.. Thousands of private events, hitherto exempt, become licensable if 'for consideration and with a view to profit'.
d.. The same applies to any private performance raising money for charity.
e.. A new licensing criterion is introduced: the provision of 'entertainment facilities'. This could mean professional rehearsal studios, broadasting studios etc will be illegal unless first licensed.
f.. Musicians could be guilty of a criminal offence if they don't check first that premises hold the appropriate authorisation for their performance.
g.. Likewise someone organising a karaoke night in a pub.
h.. Buskers similarly potential criminals - unless they perform under a licensing authorisation.
i.. Church bell ringing could be licensable.
j.. 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?]

I've just realised I've got to pass this onto the bell-ringers I know too!