UK News

Bollywood movie channel B4U has Joined Swedish channel Kanal 5 to be the second UK-based cable and satellite service to get a £10,000 fine in 24 hours.

The ITC has slapped the £10,000 fine on B4U because it broadcast three films during the day which they deemed unsuitable for broadcast before the 9pm watershed. All three films contained "frequent fist fights, beatings and gun fights", according to the ITC.

B4U has been fined over the scheduling of three films in March at 4pm, which had either "15" or "18" video classifications. The ITC programming code states that no film with a "15" rating should be broadcast before 9pm, while "18" certificate movies must be scheduled after 10pm. In fact the films had been edited to reduce the offence to th ITC.

A Swedish satellite channel that broadcasts from the UK has also been fined £10,000 by the ITC for screening a sexually explicit image during the day. Kanal 5, a general entertainment TV service, showed a trailer for a late-night sex advice show.

The watchdog said it decided to exact the penalty because a picture  of a couple having sex  was broadcast when children could have been watching. Kanal 5 broadcast the still, monochrome image as part of the trailer 67 times between March 20 and 26.

Thanks to Chris Gee for his excellent work at the Lib Dem conference.:

We are disappointed that our policy has been referred back. As I said before this does not mean the policy was rejected, just that a policy working group will be set up and that will report back within 18 months. Their proposals Will then be put to conference.   It is likely their proposals will be loosely based on our motion, we hope to get lots of supportive people on the working group. If not we will be putting in amendments.

On a positive note there will be opportunities for people outside the party to make submissions to the group. I will keep your site informed of opportunities to influence the debate.

The conference debate went really well and had we got to a yes-no vote on the motion we would have won. A real shame that we lost by 31 votes to Simon Hughes in the reference back.

Thanks to Tony. I feel that Human Rights legislation should enable us to put the boot on the other foot. Worcester Trading Substandards should be made to show their justification of harm, especially now that that the disputed material is now perfectly legal and even state certificated. If not they should be sued for imposing undue restrictions on legitimate trade.

Just to keep you up to date regarding Taboo and the sale of R18s videos and DVDs on the taboo web site. On Thursday of this week 5/09/02 the Worcester trading standards came in to the shop to see if l would give them an interview regarding sale of videos on web site, As l was not here they had to deal with a member of my Staff which went as follows.
Full name and address was given to them.
Q Is Mr Tozer Here
A Sorry he is away
Q Do you have is mobile number
A Sorry, he has lost his phone
Q We gave him the opportunity to give a interview, which he has not done, so we are giving him this opportunity before we submit our report.
A Well sorry he is not here.
Q Is he a sole trader, or is there a partner
A No comment
Q Are you a limited company
A No comment
Q What is your best seller
A Don't know
Q Do you make a good profit
A Don't know
Q Can you pass those certificates off the wall ( behind counter )
A No, sorry l can't
Q Is that his full name on the certificates,
A As far as l know
They then tried to lean over the counter to try and read all the paperwork on the wall, member of staff stood in the way, ( to protect the till )
They then looked around the shop from the counter and left the shop. At no point as any paperwork been handed over to my member of staff. She then rang me and l have got our solicitors to deal with it. They will be back on Monday or Tuesday, but l will be here this time to deal with the matter.

If you read this and own a sex shop, make sure you let your staff know what to say.
If you have any comments please e.mail me at tony@taboo.co.uk

From The Scotsman

Shop window displays advertising Irvine Welsh's new book Porno have been removed from two Princes Street stores after complaints that were obscene.

Waterstone's put blow-up dolls and condoms in the windows of its East and West End shops to promote the sequel to the Edinburgh writer's best-seller Trainspotting. Staff sources said the displays - on view through a peephole in the blacked-out window - had been removed after a number of complaints. Waterstone's claimed the promotional material had been due to be removed - after just two days - but admitted several people had objected.  A spokeswoman for the firm said similar stunts in Glasgow had not resulted in complaints, adding the blow-up dolls "weren't the kind you would get in Soho".

Porno is the number one best-seller in Scotland this week and Waterstone's has sold around 2000 copies of it in its Scottish stores. In it, some of the best-known characters from the original, including Simon "Sick Boy" Williamson, Francis Begbie and Mark Renton, who was played by Scots actor Ewan McGregor in the film of Trainspotting, are reunited.

A spokesman for Lothian and Borders Police said the force had no record of any official complaints being made.

Earlier in the week Waterstone's upset Scots writer Iain Banks by scrapping a special event on September 11, at which he was due to unveil his new book, in case it caused offence. Dead Air, his 11th mainstream novel, is about a "shock jock" DJ who rails at US President George Bush and Israel, and begins on September 11 last year.

From The Independent

Moves to liberalise the sex trade and sales of pornography have caused a rift among senior Liberal Democrats in the run up to their annual conference.

The proposals could be rejected after the party's leadership stepped in to block a motion calling for changes in the law. A similar debate and other controversial motions were shelved last year following the 11 September terror attacks.

But the Young Liberal Democrats wanted to renew their call at this year's Brighton gathering for the minimum age for buying top-shelf magazines and sex videos to be reduced from 18 to 16, and for a more mature attitude to pornography.

The conference will also hear demands for the penalties to be toughened up for non-consensual, exploitative pornography, including child pornography.

One Liberal Democrat MP said: "It is time for a modern approach to pornography. It is about having a sensible attitude that says that if it exploits children or is violent the penalties should be greater. But if it is consenting adults, we should not be trying to limit enjoyment of it. This is the view that most people take on this. So if it's acceptable, why be prudish about it?

Party sources said the increase in pornography on the internet and the loosening of trade barriers in Europe meant the subject had to be seen in a more global context. One said: There is an argument for a wider consensus on the regulation of pornography. We have got to the point where Britain's pornography laws have been, for whatever reason, old fashioned and unwilling to face up to the reality of what is happening in terms of technological advances and in different states in Europe. It may be time to actually have this debate.

But Simon Hughes, the party's home affairs spokesman who will answer the debate, is to urge delegates to refer the issue back for further work to be done on proposals. I think it does not properly address all the issues and concerns, and I don't think we should go into views on these things without having done the work properly, The motion is misleading in places, weak in places and in some part unacceptable to a sufficient group in the party, and I am not comfortable about it being agreed as it is at the moment. (Why is it that as soon as a politician is given a role to do with home affairs they have to transform into a reactionary, rightwing, holier than thou shit)

The shameful Hughes feels that the issue must be seen in the context of reforms to sexual offences legislation, the consultation paper on communications and the media and the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act. He said there was a clear link between pornography and violence that had to be addressed. It is clearly the case that people's behaviour doesn't settle until they are in their 20s and therefore we would not want to leap speedily.

Thanks to Peter for forwarding me his email query to Hughes. We are all awaiting his response.

Dear Simon,

In a recent article in The Independent (25th August) regarding the Liberal Democrat policy on the sex trade and pornography, I was appalled to read the following sentence attributed to you:

He said there was a clear link between pornography and violence that had to be addressed.

As someone with a particular (non-commercial) interest in issues of censorship and obscenity, I have to tell you that there is no proven link between pornography and violence.

I'm disappointed that you appear to be against a review of our laws which are completely out of line with the rest of Europe.

Most of all, however, I'm disturbed that you appear to have accepted the anti-pornography propaganda that true liberals have been fighting for generations...

Thanks to the Melon Farmers' Edinburgh Correspondent.

Little story of recent times in Edinburgh. A friend of mine opened a sex shop fairly near me, much to the abhorrence of some local residents....actually there were 14 complaints (objections) to Leather & Lace opening, mainly from two church groups. Needless to say the Edinburgh city council had the good sense to grant a licence to the premises, and within the last year he has now opened another branch in another part of the city....again to much (little) objection which again was brushed aside by the council. Both shops are very discretely placed with nice looking frosted out exteriors. Now that was close on a year ago, no more complaints, the shops are doing well and go pretty much unnoticed by anyone except customers. Now is when things get a little more interesting, three months ago a trading licence application went before the council which was passed without any problem. The licence was for 'Ann Summers', for which a store is now open in the capital, in the prestigious 'Princes street' no less. As soon as the papers got wind of this it made headline news, not just in the local press but in the nationals as well Kinky sex shop in Edinburgh!, hhmmm I thought, any readers who have been to Edinburgh recently will have seen it or missed it....its that easy, doors wide open it looks no different from the neighbouring stores, 'Next' 'River Island' etc. By this time letters were being written by our moral guardians-aka-saddo's with nothing better to do.

Also in the news in recent years was the Edinburgh council attitude to the sex trade, more precise 'massage parlours' of which there are many quietly hidden away, apart from the usual bible bashing complaint now and again these establishments went about their business daily without problem and without objection from residents, the council decided in its wisdom to licence these saunas for sex, without actually legalising prostitution. Everyone was happy as it kept the trade off the street (mostly) and freed up police time.

That was until now, the threat is now here to close down every sauna in Edinburgh, thanks to a local business consultant by the name of Mike Anthony, who has decided to embark upon a moral crusade (for all our good no doubt!).

He claims it is unlawful for the council to renew their licences, he said the council are fully aware that prostitution takes place in some saunas. Granting these licences would be an aid to prostitution and accordingly a criminal offence. Councillors have no right to discriminate against ordinary persons by allowing a special class of people the right to wantonly break the law. Mr Anthony has lodged 19 objections to various saunas across the city having their licences renewed, due to be heard in the next few weeks. He claims if they are renewed he will carry it on to the sheriff court and further if need be. This challenge which is somehow based on the European human rights laws has the potential to close down every sauna in Edinburgh.

A council insider, according to the Edinburgh evening news said, Everybody knows the girls who work in some saunas are carrying out some form of prostitution, but its behind closed doors so there is no proof illegal activity is going on.

The city's licensing committee vice-convenor, Trevor Davies, defended Edinburgh's approach to the sex trade, saying, Our priority has been on regulation and toleration. We have been successful in protecting the lives and health of people working in the sex industry here, Glasgow cannot make the same claim. What he means is, Glasgow do not have any tolerance and prostitution has been forced onto the streets there, and as you may know by news reports over very recent years, a lot of working girls have been murdered in Glasgow.

Lothian and Borders police declined to comment on the legal challenge to license renewal of the saunas. I will keep you up to date on this case, but lets all get behind Edinburgh council in this one, they are up against a moral minority of 'one' who wants his way because he 'disapproves'. The trouble is once word gets out, these nutters tend to find more influential 'friends' who want to get their name in the news. Watch this space.

It appears that gangs of lawless brigands masquerading as officials have been roaming the channel ports stealing cars, humiliating innocent people and stealing our rights. Isn't it about time the police stepped in to arrest these lawbreakers.

Customs officers have no right to stop and search returning cross-channel travellers for alcohol and tobacco unless they have reasonable grounds for suspicion, the High Court ruled yesterday.

Two judges ordered Customs and Excise to return drink, cigarettes and a car  seized from a family at Dover last summer, or pay them compensation.

Lord Justice Brooke and Mr Justice Bell said the mindset of Customs policy-makers has not embraced the world of an internal market where excise goods can move freely across internal frontiers, subject only to checks made where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that an individual traveller holds alcohol or tobacco for a commercial purpose and  not for his own use.

The test case was brought by Hoverspeed, the ferry operator, on behalf of its passengers Alan and Pauline Andrews, of Widnes, Cheshire, who were on a shopping trip last August. Mr Andrews's car was damaged, so he had borrowed a Nissan Micra belonging to his sister, Lynne Andrews. The couple were travelling with Miss Andrews's lodger, George Wilkinson, of   Runcorn, who smoked 60 cigarettes a day and was on incapacity benefit. After taking the hovercraft to Calais, they drove into Belgium where they bought 25,200 cigarettes, 17.5lb of hand-rolling tobacco, two cases of wine and some spirits. Customs officers said they did not believe Mr Wilkinson had bought 10,000 cigarettes for his own use. As a result, officers seized all the goods and  the car, even though Mr Andrews said it belonged to his sister.

The judges said that "because Customs and Excise did not explain to the court the reasons why they stopped Mr and Mrs Andrews and Mr Wilkinson, and because they suggested in their evidence that they might stop passengers for legally inadmissible reasons, they did not prove to the court that there were reasonable grounds for stopping the car and questioning the occupants.

The goods in it should therefore not have been seized. Nor should the car. In the event Customs' refusal to return the car to Miss Andrews without even considering whether it might be restored to her on payment of an appropriately proportionate sum represented a disproportionate response.

In general, Customs officers had no right to stop and search people or their vehicles at an internal EU frontier unless there were reasonable grounds to suspect them of holding goods bought for commercial purposes. In the absence of such suspicion on an individualised basis, they have no right to impede Community travellers' movement at the frontier for purposes connected with the collection of excise duty."

That ruling was made under European Community law which provides for free movement within the internal market of people and goods.

The Human Rights Convention does not permit a public authority to act in a disproportionate way when forfeiting a person's property, however keen it is on a harsh deterrent policy for the greater public good.

A 1992 Excise Duty Order was incompatible with the relevant European directive because it wrongly reversed the burden of proof, requiring individuals to establish that they were not holding goods for commercial purposes.

Customs and Excise was ordered to pay 80 per cent of the costs incurred by Hoverspeed on behalf of itself and its passengers. It was granted permission to appeal because of the "great public importance" of the case.

The Guardian, the Financial Times, the Independent, the Times and Reuters have been ordered by the High Court to hand over to the Belgian brewer Interbrew a leaked document from an anonymous source. They have refused to do so. They have claimed the sacrosanct right of a journalist to protect his sources and have taken the argument to the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords, losing each time. Now, self-righteous as ever, the editors want to go to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg to try for a more favourable result. Why cannot they accept that they are wrong and that the courts are better able than arrogant newspaper editors to weigh up the rights of each party and to achieve justice?

If the lawyers for Interbrew manage to have the editors committed to prison, would that not be a cause for some rejoicing?

The courts in the UK have acknowledged that a journalist does have a right to protect his sources but that this is not an absolute right which takes precedence over everyone else's rights. In certain types of case the public interest demands that a leaked document must be handed over to a party who has been damaged by the document. The House of Lords recently gave an authoritative judgment on the state of the law as regards a journalist's right to protect its sources in the Ashworth Hospital case (which relates to the leaking of confidential notes concerning Ian Brady the Moors Murderer) at tinyurl.com/n0m

The liberalisation of pornography motion to Lib Dem conference has once again been accepted onto the agenda for this years conference. The motion was in part inspired by a piece melon farmers did on the outdated party policy passed way back in 1989.
It was again put forward by Lib Dem Youth & Students www.ldys.org.uk and it will be debated sometime at the Conference being held at Brighton Sunday 22nd - Thursday 26th September.

Most MP's have expressed their support for the motion when questioned by newspapers looking for "party split" stories. It was removed from the agenda last year following the September 11th tragedy, leaving more time for the party to debate International Security.

Bad news from my favourite band:

This is to tell you all that the forthcoming gig at Worcester on Tues 9th July will be our last UK gig ever. In fact it will be one of the last gigs anywhere ever as we are now completely stopping live concerts/gigging/touring - whatever you want to call it.

I imagine you'll want to know why...
Yesterday we were en-route to our gig in Sheffield, England when the phone rang and we were informed that the council had put massive pressure on the venue and that the gig would not now be going ahead.
...We believe that someone on the council saw the 'Anna in Wonderland' program on us the night before on BBC choice, and freaked out. This gig has been booked for over a month, and we've played it a couple of times before with no problems, so there's no real reason for it to be suddenly pulled.

Bit of an over-reaction to never gig again just because of that, you may think. But this is the straw that has finally broken the back of a very tired, very beaten camel.

Over the last few years the tactic of last second cancellation has been a common one used against us - it inflicts maximum financial damage (obviously because we've already travelled or are travelling to the country, have bought/hired all the gear/food/hotels/vehicles/etc,)
...Add to this that because gigs are commonly at the weekend, and the ultimatum is often given to the venue last thing on a Friday afternoon, (even on a big tour) it means that we can't even use official methods of wrangling as a comeback - we just lose. We just lose...

We are professional musicians. The commune is solely financially supported by the band, and rich we are not - in fact if we didn't live communally there's no way we could have carried on as long as we have with these kind of losses.
...In the past we've lost 44 dates at once, we've lost 20 dates at once, we've had a (false) statement that we broke restrictions faxed to every venue on an English tour resulting in the last nine dates being pulled - we survived it.

But we can't afford to live like this any longer...but I don't want to give the impression that it is solely a money thing. We could carry on scraping by...but now you have to imagine some other layers to the situation in addition to the above emotionally and financially devastating inconstancy.

- Imagine just how deadly serious about our art, our music, our soci-sexual politics we are, many of you know how much we put our hearts and soul into creating our music and performances and then -
...: imagine the destructive negativism that is aimed at that, at us, from the music industry and the media.
...: imagine the effect of, not just unfounded negative revues, ( we can take criticism) but actual vicious lies about our skill, our motives, even our bodies...now imagine years of it.
...: imagine, not lack of support, but actual destructiveness and career blocking from the very people within the industry who are supposedly on our side - and here, for legal reasons, I can't even really hint at the poison and bullshit. Why do you think there has been no second album release ?
...Actually, without having lived it, without me writing a daily account of the last five years, you can't - and as I re-read what I'm writing, it all sounds terribly puerile and melodramatic...however, I'm trusting that all of you, those who are our genuine fans will KNOW our integrity and dedication, and KNOW that we wouldn't do this lightly or over some imagined affront. We've stuck to it because we believe in the validity and value of our message and because of the plain simple joy of being creative musical people who love the unique interaction of playing in front of a crowd.

And we're sorry. To all the decent people, the fans of just the music, or just the sex, or the both combined. To those who contributed financially, however small to our legal battles, to those who bought the album, videos, or bought us little presents - to all those we've had sex with - who we've loved and been loved by in return. We're sorry it has to end like this. It's not what we planned or wanted or hoped for. I know we're going to drown in emails now, but this is it and nothing you dear people can say will change the situation.

BUT NOW HERE IS THE GOOD NEWS...
The commune is not splitting up, no way. Our lifestyle and craft will continue as it has always done. Rockbitch will be reduced (elevated maybe?) to an internet presence. I will finish what will now be the sole representation of the band - the new website www.rockbitch.com
...This will be a members-only pay site which will contain truths about our pagan sex-magik practices, advice and how-to-do the same/similar, personal accounts and perspectives from all the women and photo galleries of rituals.
...Membership will also finally allow you to download our music, (including the stuff you've all been waiting for but has never been released) also downloadable mini-clips of video footage recorded specifically for the site. A webcam will also be installed in the commune itself. Our dream is that if membership of this site is sufficient, that we will eventually be able to arrange private members-only concerts - 'Rockbitch reunited' if you like...

I'm sure some who receive this email will see it as a cynical marketing ploy - yeah well, think whatever you like, you are part of the reason it's all over.

We will still continue calling up and fucking Platinum condom winners though..