Tenth Anniversary of the Cove House Inn session - HELP!
Tenth Anniversary of the Cove House Inn session - HELP!
My wife and I started the Thursday night session at the Cove House Inn Chiswell Portland Dorset, on 7 December 2000.
Officers of our Council advised that it to be (more than) two performers in a public entertainment and were determined to prevent the session unless the licensee obtained additional entertainment licensing.
The licensee never considered the session to be licensable but was faced with written threats of prosecution with a possible £20,000 fine or six months in prison. Mainly because conventional entertainment was staged on Friday nights, the licensee did obtain this licensing and this ensured the session’s survival.
The usual outcome of such disputes was that a licensee ended the session. Many thanks must be due to this licensee and to the next licensees and also to the current licensees. No thanks are due to my local authority.
In December 2010, the session will be ten years old. There is much cause to celebrate this.
However, this is tainted by the fact that despite a major reform of licensing legislation, my local authority still advises that the only way such sessions can take place is with additional Premises Licence Entertainment permission, as a performance of Regulated Entertainment which cannot benefit from any of the exemptions contained in the Licensing Act 2003.
Such advice, presents serious and unnecessary risks. It places participatory sessions in direct competition with conventional entertainment for available nights.
My view is that the music making in such sessions are not performance. It is only performance which is licensable.
That all a pub’s customer needs to make music, is the licensee’s agreement. The relationship between performer and licensee is one of temporary employee and employer. Where a performer is under some obligation to the licensee to stage a performance, customers participating in sessions are under no obligation.
I am trying to get my local authority, to adopt a policy which treats participatory music making in pubs in the same way as participatory games of indoor sport. The point is recognised locally when indoor sports become licensable performances but no similar distinction is made for participatory music making.
I may be helpful and benefit sessions generally, if anyone wishing to ensure that The Cove session’s ten years can be celebrated as the valuable social and cultural activity that it undoubtedly would write to the Mayor of;
Weymouth and Portland Borough Council,
North Quay
Weymouth
Dorset DT4 8TA
England
Telephone +44 (01305) 838000
The following from Scheldule 1 of the Licensing Act 2001:
(2) The first condition is that the entertainment is, or entertainment facilities are, provided—
(a) to any extent for members of the public or a section of the public,
My view is that if participatory pub sessions are judged to be licensable by virtue of other pub customers being considered as an audience - then it follows that participatory indoor sports like pool and darts in pubs must also be judged to be licensable.
Re: Tenth Anniversary of the Cove House Inn session - HELP!
Yes, I agree with you, Roger.
However, there is a get-out clause; "Morris Dancing".
Tie a bell round each of your knees, and say you are morris dancers.
They they can't touch you.
On the other hand you have a bunch of tossers and jobsworths on your local council who seem unaware of the contribution you are making to the local cultural life. This is not unknown in England, unfortunately.
Re: Tenth Anniversary of the Cove House Inn session - HELP!
The following from Shedule 1 of the Licensing Act 2003:
Morris dancing etc.11 The provision of any entertainment or entertainment facilities is not to be regarded as the provision of regulated entertainment for the purposes of this Act to the extent that it consists of the provision of—
(a) a performance of morris dancing or any dancing of a similar nature or a performance of unamplified, live music as an integral part of such a performance , or
(b) facilities for enabling persons to take part in entertainment of a description falling within paragraph (a).......
Above is the exemption being referred to.
But as I have said, the council employee's advice is that sessions cannot benefit from any of the exemptions contained in the Licensing Act 2003.
There are many such 'get-outs' which could be used but these employees are making it clear that they have no intention of using them in order to avoid the risks presented to sessions by their advice. In fact this advice has already been responsible for the loss of another session at the New Star. In this case, the licensing permission (then the old Public Entertainment Licence PEL) was not obtained and the session ended, when a letter from these employees was received.
After the new legislation came in, I made an attempt to see if the advice would allow a re-start of this session but the advice had not changed in any degree, although the legislation had.
Sadly, it does not seem to matter what the legislation says, when legislation like this is delegated to local authorities, the law in effect becomes what those who are paid to enforce it, wish it to be.
I have not been successful but up to now, mine has largely been a lone voice. It may be helpful if those who understand what sessions are (and what they are not) you could write their suggestions for a solution directly to my local authority and post their progress here.
Re: Tenth Anniversary of the Cove House Inn session - HELP!
Have you tried, seriously, enlisting your local MP ?
After all, he/she was a member of the House that passed this law; he/she should know and understand the intentions and implications of the law better than the local council jobsworths.
Also,have you tried getting in the MU, Feargal Sharkey ( has some important job re music culture ) etc. ?
Failing that, getting in a local lawyer on a Pro Bono basis ?
Re: Tenth Anniversary of the Cove House Inn session - HELP!
The sad thing is that I have tried or am trying all that you suggest and more.
My MP has been involved since Labour’s first term of office. At my request, my MP formed part of the Standing Committee which produced the Bill. The resulting legislation is far from sensible but it does not support the advice being provided by my council’s employees.
Every Licensing Authority is now required to form Licensing Committee to decide all licensing matters and to produce and review, with public consultation, a Statement of Licensing Policy. This should have solved the problem but these employees show no sign of changing their approach or of giving up any of the considerable power they have always exerted on licensing matters. My MP’s attempts to persuade them, have all failed to date.
The Local Government Ombudsman should act as a watchdog but its record shows that they very rarely find any fault with Councils. I can personally confirm this.
The MU does not represent the interests of music it represents the interests of its members. Mr Sharkey has never bothered to reply to me.
The problem with a legal approach, apart from the cost, is that any test of this situation requires finding a licensee who is willing to risk prosecution.
The only way forward is for pressure to be applied on the elected members of the council from folk like yourself who know and care about sessions. This will also make it difficult for my continuing attempts to obtain sensible local policy to be dismissed as easily as they currently are.
Tenth Anniversary of the Cove House Inn session - HELP!
Tenth Anniversary of the Cove House Inn session - HELP!
My wife and I started the Thursday night session at the Cove House Inn Chiswell Portland Dorset, on 7 December 2000.
Officers of our Council advised that it to be (more than) two performers in a public entertainment and were determined to prevent the session unless the licensee obtained additional entertainment licensing.
The licensee never considered the session to be licensable but was faced with written threats of prosecution with a possible £20,000 fine or six months in prison. Mainly because conventional entertainment was staged on Friday nights, the licensee did obtain this licensing and this ensured the session’s survival.
The usual outcome of such disputes was that a licensee ended the session. Many thanks must be due to this licensee and to the next licensees and also to the current licensees. No thanks are due to my local authority.
In December 2010, the session will be ten years old. There is much cause to celebrate this.
However, this is tainted by the fact that despite a major reform of licensing legislation, my local authority still advises that the only way such sessions can take place is with additional Premises Licence Entertainment permission, as a performance of Regulated Entertainment which cannot benefit from any of the exemptions contained in the Licensing Act 2003.
Such advice, presents serious and unnecessary risks. It places participatory sessions in direct competition with conventional entertainment for available nights.
My view is that the music making in such sessions are not performance. It is only performance which is licensable.
That all a pub’s customer needs to make music, is the licensee’s agreement. The relationship between performer and licensee is one of temporary employee and employer. Where a performer is under some obligation to the licensee to stage a performance, customers participating in sessions are under no obligation.
I am trying to get my local authority, to adopt a policy which treats participatory music making in pubs in the same way as participatory games of indoor sport. The point is recognised locally when indoor sports become licensable performances but no similar distinction is made for participatory music making.
I may be helpful and benefit sessions generally, if anyone wishing to ensure that The Cove session’s ten years can be celebrated as the valuable social and cultural activity that it undoubtedly would write to the Mayor of;
Weymouth and Portland Borough Council,
North Quay
Weymouth
Dorset DT4 8TA
England
Telephone +44 (01305) 838000
# Posted on July 4th 2009 by Roger Gall
Re: Tenth Anniversary of the Cove House Inn session - HELP!
Well, you can believe anything you like. what does the law say?
# Posted on July 4th 2009 by jwvansteenwyk
Re: Tenth Anniversary of the Cove House Inn session - HELP!
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2003/ukpga_20030017_en_15#sch1
The following from Scheldule 1 of the Licensing Act 2001:
(2) The first condition is that the entertainment is, or entertainment facilities are, provided—
(a) to any extent for members of the public or a section of the public,
My view is that if participatory pub sessions are judged to be licensable by virtue of other pub customers being considered as an audience - then it follows that participatory indoor sports like pool and darts in pubs must also be judged to be licensable.
What is your view?
# Posted on July 5th 2009 by Roger Gall
Re: Tenth Anniversary of the Cove House Inn session - HELP!
Yes, I agree with you, Roger.
However, there is a get-out clause; "Morris Dancing".
Tie a bell round each of your knees, and say you are morris dancers.
They they can't touch you.
On the other hand you have a bunch of tossers and jobsworths on your local council who seem unaware of the contribution you are making to the local cultural life. This is not unknown in England, unfortunately.
# Posted on July 5th 2009 by Guernsey Pete
Re: Tenth Anniversary of the Cove House Inn session - HELP!
The following from Shedule 1 of the Licensing Act 2003:
Morris dancing etc.11 The provision of any entertainment or entertainment facilities is not to be regarded as the provision of regulated entertainment for the purposes of this Act to the extent that it consists of the provision of—
(a) a performance of morris dancing or any dancing of a similar nature or a performance of unamplified, live music as an integral part of such a performance , or
(b) facilities for enabling persons to take part in entertainment of a description falling within paragraph (a).......
Above is the exemption being referred to.
But as I have said, the council employee's advice is that sessions cannot benefit from any of the exemptions contained in the Licensing Act 2003.
There are many such 'get-outs' which could be used but these employees are making it clear that they have no intention of using them in order to avoid the risks presented to sessions by their advice. In fact this advice has already been responsible for the loss of another session at the New Star. In this case, the licensing permission (then the old Public Entertainment Licence PEL) was not obtained and the session ended, when a letter from these employees was received.
After the new legislation came in, I made an attempt to see if the advice would allow a re-start of this session but the advice had not changed in any degree, although the legislation had.
Sadly, it does not seem to matter what the legislation says, when legislation like this is delegated to local authorities, the law in effect becomes what those who are paid to enforce it, wish it to be.
I have not been successful but up to now, mine has largely been a lone voice. It may be helpful if those who understand what sessions are (and what they are not) you could write their suggestions for a solution directly to my local authority and post their progress here.
# Posted on July 6th 2009 by Roger Gall
Re: Tenth Anniversary of the Cove House Inn session - HELP!
Have you tried, seriously, enlisting your local MP ?
After all, he/she was a member of the House that passed this law; he/she should know and understand the intentions and implications of the law better than the local council jobsworths.
Also,have you tried getting in the MU, Feargal Sharkey ( has some important job re music culture ) etc. ?
Failing that, getting in a local lawyer on a Pro Bono basis ?
# Posted on July 6th 2009 by Guernsey Pete
Re: Tenth Anniversary of the Cove House Inn session - HELP!
The sad thing is that I have tried or am trying all that you suggest and more.
My MP has been involved since Labour’s first term of office. At my request, my MP formed part of the Standing Committee which produced the Bill. The resulting legislation is far from sensible but it does not support the advice being provided by my council’s employees.
Every Licensing Authority is now required to form Licensing Committee to decide all licensing matters and to produce and review, with public consultation, a Statement of Licensing Policy. This should have solved the problem but these employees show no sign of changing their approach or of giving up any of the considerable power they have always exerted on licensing matters. My MP’s attempts to persuade them, have all failed to date.
The Local Government Ombudsman should act as a watchdog but its record shows that they very rarely find any fault with Councils. I can personally confirm this.
The MU does not represent the interests of music it represents the interests of its members. Mr Sharkey has never bothered to reply to me.
The problem with a legal approach, apart from the cost, is that any test of this situation requires finding a licensee who is willing to risk prosecution.
The only way forward is for pressure to be applied on the elected members of the council from folk like yourself who know and care about sessions. This will also make it difficult for my continuing attempts to obtain sensible local policy to be dismissed as easily as they currently are.
Your help will be much appreciated.
# Posted on July 6th 2009 by Roger Gall