Policing live music

Submitted by AWL on 9 February, 2003 - 10:32

Robb Johnson takes a look at what the new Licensing Bill will mean for live music "at the margins"
The Licensing Bill will make live music illegal. Okay, that's probably just the sort of alarmist assertion the government are accusing the Musicians' Union of propagating in their opposition to the current proposed Licensing Bill.
But just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get you!

The Government claim the new law will not only do away with closing time, but also the "two in a bar" rule that prevented pubs without an entertainment licence having more than two people performing music at any one time. That latter rule has been used by some councils to prosecute pubs for having folk music sessions, Morris Dancers and even punters "rhythmically swaying" to background music.

The trouble is, even with the kindest of interpretations, the proposed legislation is just as open to abuse by zealous councils intent on gathering revenue through fines as the old legislation was. But what is more alarming is that now all live music in any and all venues-not just pubs-is a potential target for prosecution if councils consider it falls foul of the proposed licensing laws.

Successful prosecutions mean fines of up to £20,000 and up to six months' imprisonment.

The triggers for needing a licence are if a profit or a "consideration" is involved and if there are spectators (not necessarily an "audience").

It is not just live music that will be affected. The Bill also controls theatrical performances (and the law specifies bizarrely that a rehearsal counts as a performance), film shows (unless taking place in a museum or art gallery), and anything else they haven't specifically mentioned that is "of a similar description".

Doing something for charity is no exception. The only public entertainments specifically exempted are films that demonstrate products, advertise goods or services, or provide information, education and instruction. Background muzak is okay too, as is watching television.

Yet the government insists that musicians who are concerned that live music in pubs is being replaced by Sky TV are being alarmist.

Following the government defence of this Bill in the face of the opposition it has generated is like becoming involved in a novel by Franz Kafka.

Churches have had most success in getting the Government to reconsider some of the effects this legislation will have on use of church premises, whereas musicians have met with complete antagonism from the government, particularly from Dr Kim Howells, Kulturführer at the Department of Culture, Music and Sport (DCMS).

When the Musicians' Union responded to Howell's persistent allegation that they were running a campaign of "pernicious lying" against the Bill, by asking independent lawyers to give their opinions on the effects that the legislation would have (these opinions pretty much vindicating what the MU had been saying), the DCMS then started issuing statements "explaining" what the legislation really meant, or rather what they intended the legislation to mean.

In many instances these intentions appear to contradict the statements contained in the wording of the Bill. But these Departmental statements have no legal status, unless the Bill is drastically reworded to make them explicit, and, even then, there are bad core principles that remain unaltered.

First, there is the Kafkaesque, bureaucratic hassle involved in obtaining a licence. Premises apply for a lifetime licence for entertainment, along with a licence to sell alcohol, which will cost between £110 and £500, renewable with a smaller fee (around £50) once a year. This involves application to the licensing authority, payment of the above-mentioned fee, notification, presumably, of the police, plus the approval of neighbours.

Religious premises, however, enjoy "an exemption for any entertainment for the purposes of, or incidental to, a religious meeting or service", and can apparently now stage five events a year without applying for a licence.
Individuals over 18 can apparently apply up to five times to stage up to five events a year, each lasting up to 72 hours "where less than 500 people attend". [To hold five parties? Ed.] The latest proclamation from the DCMS puts this in the context of use of community halls, these events to be known as "permitted temporary activities" that "will require a simple notification to the licensing authority and the police and a small fee of around £20".

Howells presents all these as mere formalities, and hasn't specified what requirements-in terms of health and safety, for example-these formalities might involve.

Second, and perhaps of more significance because it involves the principle of ordinary people's rights to determine their own culture, the government is making our right to self-expression a matter for licensing control.
Full stop.

Think about how this will work in practice.
It won't affect artists who work in the high-culture, highly-subsidised mainstream. It won't affect artists who work in the media-sanctioned capital-intensive pop-culture. But it will certainly affect you and your mates when you want to put on your first gig. It will certainly affect you and your comrades when you want to put on the next benefit. It will certainly affect the thousands of people who work outside the mainstream, who create without the official endorsement of capitalist business norms. It will affect the sort of places where we created blues, punk, rap, deejaying. It will shut down the margins.

In reality, regardless of size of event, regardless of type of event, regardless of what the government says its intentions are, if we wish to express ourselves anywhere through music and dance and drama, unless we can prove legally that we do it completely free of "any charge for the provision of goods or services", our creativity becomes a matter for licensing control.

You don't need a licence for a dog, but you will soon need one for a musician!

This website uses cookies, you can find out more and set your preferences here.
By continuing to use this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions.