UK Parliament Watch

 2013: July-Sept

2000   2001   2002   2004   2005   2006   2007   2008   2009   2010   2011   2012   2013   2014   2015   2016   2017  
Jan-March   April-June   July-Sept   Oct-Dec   Latest  


 Update: Parliamentary scrutiny hasn't just failed. It doesn't exist...

Tom Watson MP: 'The surveillance state is running amok and Parliament has absolutely failed'


Link Here 27th September 2013  full story: Snooper's Charter...Tories re-start massive programme of communications snooping
tom watsonLabour MP Tom Watson spoke out at the Labour Conference to criticise Ed Miliband, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and the rest of Parliament for turning a blind eye to the explosive growth in the power of the surveillance state

Speaking in the light of a summer of revelations from whistleblower Edward Snowden about the Internet surveillance programmes of British and American intelligence, he said:

We're living in the most closed system of liberal democracy in the Western world. We have the most unaccountable intelligence services.

Parliamentary scrutiny hasn't just failed. It doesn't exist.

I can't think what any party leader has said about this. That's an absolute disgrace. This is a callous denial of our freedom.

I have no faith in the Intelligence and Security Committee [which is charged with overseeing the UK intelligence agencies]. I hope Parliamentarians say we're not going to take it this anymore.

We have to say we're not going to put up with this and build a cross-party coalition to make the intelligence services accountable for once and for all and provide oversight of a surveillance state running amok.

He was speaking at a fringe event hosted by campaign groups Open Rights Group and Big Brother Watch.

Also speaking was Paul Johnson, the Deputy Editor of The Guardian who has orchestrated their coverage of the Edward Snowden revelations. He talked about:

The most surreal 36 hours I've ever had as a journalist where, on the orders of GCHQ, we bought masks and anglegrinders...to destroy the material [that they had from Edward Snowden].

We told them two weeks earlier it was already in New York. The whole thing was surreal. It was an entirely bizarre moment. It illustrates at heart that the British Government doesn't believe this story should have been written.

Javier Ruiz, Campaigns Director of Open Rights Group called for the start of a movement against mass surveillance:

This isn't just the responsibility of political parties. We really need to look at a political solution that involves citizens, government and private companies.

Nick Pickles - Director of Big Brother Watch, told the audience:

How we govern data isn't fit for the Internet age. Parliament need to drag the intelligence agencies into the open. Secrecy cannot be justified to simply prevent embarrassment. We've been telling the world to do one thing while doing a completely different thing ourselves.

 

 Update: Searching for a Magic Bullet...

Google condemned by UK MPs for linking to piracy


Link Here 26th September 2013  full story: Internet Blocking File Sharing in UK...High court dictates website block
Culture, Media and Sport select committeeA House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee report has condemned Google's failure to adequately respond to the issue of online piracy and its refusal to block infringing websites on the grounds they might also carry legal material. Citing the recent successful prosecution of a streaming site admin, the committee also calls for punishment in such cases to be extended to 10 years imprisonment.

During the last couple of years media industry companies have heavily criticized Google for linking to copyright-infringing material in its search results.

Google has responded by removing many millions of links but apparently that's just not enough. In the past couple of weeks the world's largest search engine has become a punching bag for the music and movie industries and today they find themselves battered again, this time by a British House of Commons report.

The reports finds many targets for criticism but begins with a swipe at the UK's leading Internet rights groups. Open Rights Group

The relationship between the strength of Britain's creative industries and robust copyright laws is acknowledged by the Open Rights Group which aims radically to liberalise the use and sharing of copyrighted content.

While we share the Open Rights Group's attachment to freedom of expression via the internet, we firmly repudiate their laissez-faire attitudes towards copyright infringement.

The report goes on to mention the creation of a new City of London Police unit dedicated to cracking down on intellectual property crime and reveals that a first-of-its-kind conference is being planned to bring players from across the world to London to discuss enforcement issues.

But inevitably the big guns were turned on the messenger. Google in the firing line again

The Committee begins by quoting Google itself, who at the time were removing around 9 million URLs from its indexes every month at the request of copyright holders. This was countered with information provided by the BPI who said that despite Google's alleged algorithm changes, the instances of infringing sites turning up in the top 10 results had fallen only marginally, from 63% in August 2012 to 61% a year later. Clearly the Committee are unimpressed. The report states:

We strongly condemn the failure of Google, notable among technology companies, to provide an adequate response to creative industry requests to prevent its search engine directing consumers to copyright-infringing websites.

We are unimpressed by their evident reluctance to block infringing websites on the flimsy grounds that some operate under the cover of hosting some legal content. The continuing promotion by search engines of illegal content on the internet is unacceptable. So far, their attempts to remedy this have been derisorily ineffective.

We do not believe it to be beyond the wit of the engineers employed by Google and others to demote and, ideally, remove copyright infringing material from search engine results. Google co-operates with law enforcement agencies to block child pornographic content from search results and it has provided no coherent, responsible answer as to why it cannot do the same for sites which blatantly, and illegally, offer pirated content.

We recommend that the maximum penalty for serious online copyright theft be extended to ten years' imprisonment. Criminal offences in the online world should attract the same penalties as those provided for the physical world by the Copyright, etc. and Trade Marks (Offences and Enforcement) Act 2002.

Finally the report criticizes the delay in implementing the controversial Digital Economy Act, stalled now for the best part of three years. In particular, the issuing of warning notices to infringers should come sooner rather than later.

We recommend that a copyright infringement notification system envisaged by the Digital Economy Act be implemented with far greater speed than the Government currently plans. By targeting information letters to the worst infringers, early implementation will, we believe, serve an important educative purpose which could percolate more widely.

Update: Open Rights Group respond

27th September 2013. See  article from  openrightsgroup.org

Open Rights Group logo Overall the Committee's report is a fairly disappointing and unimaginative piece of work. They offer a view of copyright that is too simplistic, one-sided and which effectively tries to reduce the debate to whether you like the creative industries or not. They thus ignore the wider impact of new technology on citizens as creators and participants in culture, and on how markets for cultural goods can now function most effectively.

...See Open Rights Group comments about the report

 

 Updated: The Wrong Kind of War Story...

Peers complain about the German publisher of WW2 magazine


Link Here 14th September 2013
Landser Winter experiences stories ebook A member of the house of Lords has written to Ofcom complaining that the military magazine Der Landser publishes content that glorifies German soldiers in the 2nd World War.

Monroe Palmer feels that this should disqualify the magazine's publisher, Bauer Media , from holding a broadcasting licence for Absolute Radio, which it recently acquired.

His voice is adding to several others trying to indirectly censor Bauer's magazines. Banker Bruce Fireman and another peer, Greville Janner, are also supporting the complaints.

Deidre Berger, director of the Ramer institute for German-Jewish relations explained the opposition to Bauer in an interview. She claimed the magazine encouraged young people:

To have an affinity for world war two. They're glorifying the war, and leaving out completely any mention of Germany 's responsibility for the holocaust.

Der Landser is a magazine that writes about Germany's role in the war as if the people about whom it writes were not war criminals, and some of them were.

Bauer told the BBC that the magazine complied with German law. It neither trivialised nor glorified war crimes.

Update: Ofcom Investigating

7th September 2013. See  article from  independent.co.uk

Ofcom logoOfcom has announced it is in contact with German authorities as it investigates whether Kiss FM owner Bauer is a fit and proper broadcaster, after complaints that it publishes a magazine that is said to glorify German Second World War soldiers.

Ofcom has contacted Germany's Federal Review Board for Media Harmful To Minors, the censor responsible for monitoring issues such as coverage of war atrocities.

Bauer said none of its publications trivialise or glorify National Socialism or war crimes

Update: War Censors

14th September 2013. See  article from  express.co.uk

bauer media logoBowing to international pressure, Bauer Media has announced it would stop publication of Second World War title Der Landser (The Squaddie).

The Simon Wiesenthal Centre has claimed that the magazine was making the Third Reich acceptable to a new generation of Germans.

Jewish leaders were appalled that the magazine included tributes to the brutal Waffen-SS. The director of Global Jewish Advocacy, Deidre Berger, claimed:

They encourage young people to have an affinity with World War Two. They are glorifying it and leaving out any mention of Germany's role in the Holocaust.

Bauer insisted it had been legal saying a German lawyer concludes that Der Landser complies fully with the stringent legislation in Germany and neither glorifies nor trivialises National Socialism. Its statement announced it has decided to cease publishing the series .

 

 Update: Prudish Intolerance in Relation to Sexual Entertainment...

Not so Liberal MP whinges that law allowing occasional unlicensed striptease events is being 'abused' by being used for occasional striptease events


Link Here 11th September 2013  full story: Lap Dancing License Change...UK lap dancing suffers repressive new licensing
House of Commons logoLib Dem MP Stephen Gilbert had set up a House of Commons debate to whinge about venues arranging occasional lap dancing events in Newquay.

He introduced his debate by admitting to being a begrudging 'liberal':

I want to say first what the debate is not. This is not a debate that is led by prudish intolerance in relation to sexual entertainment. I have never been to a lap-dancing club, and my view is that real men do not buy women for entertainment, but, as a Liberal, I accept that if adults want to make such choices, that is up to them. The debate is about ensuring consistency in the application of the regulation of sexual entertainment on our high streets. It is about ensuring that performers in and patrons of sexual entertainment venues---lap-dancing clubs---are properly protected and that local communities are involved in the decision-making process about where and when such venues should operate.

His basic contention was that occasional events allowed under licensing law were not governed by repressive council rules designed to ensure that table dancing is totally devoid of sexual entertainment such as dancers having to stay 3 feet aprt from customers.

Jeremy Browne, the Not So Liberal Democrat Home Office minister, seemed to agree about the need for prudery and warned that venues are abusing an exemption intended to allow one-off events such as hiring a strip-a-gram for a birthday party.

He claimed one venue used the exemption after being refused a sexual entertainment licence following protests by a few residents. He said:

The venue in question has now begun operating sexual entertainment events within the exemptions of the Act.

This is not the occasional use of a strip-a-gram but a full 24 hour window once a month to operate as a full sexual entertainment venue.

This exemption has led, in Newquay, to lap-dancing nights being offered on this so-called occasional basis in direct competition to a licensed venue, but without any of the obligations that the licensed venue needs to meet.

Gilbert called for the Government to amend the law and suggested that venues hosting lap dancing events be subject to the same stringent requirements as licensed clubs. He said:

This would require minimal effort in terms of legislation, as the existing law does allow the relevant national authority to order, amend or repeal the exemption clause without the need for primary legislation.

Speaking on behalf of the Government, Jeremy Browne said he would look the matter to see whether the legislation is being used as it is supposed to. He said:

There may be some scope for us to make changes so that that flexibility is exercised in a way that is in line with the spirit of what Parliament intended when this legislation was announced in 2009.

It is possible for ingenious owners of bars to use the exemptions in a way which gives them more scope to provide regular entertainment of a sexual entertainment than was envisaged by ministers and Parliament when this legislation was introduced in 2009.

[If] an individual owned four or five venues in a single town, it would be possible for an individual to put on a sexual entertainment evening every Saturday night at one of those venues. In a way that goes beyond the spirit of the exemptions.

 

 Updated: The Wrong Kind of War Story...

Peers complain about the German publisher of WW2 magazine


Link Here 7th September 2013
Landser Winter experiences stories ebook A member of the house of Lords has written to Ofcom complaining that the military magazine Der Landser publishes content that glorifies German soldiers in the 2nd World War.

Monroe Palmer feels that this should disqualify the magazine's publisher, Bauer Media , from holding a broadcasting licence for Absolute Radio, which it recently acquired.

His voice is adding to several others trying to indirectly censor Bauer's magazines. Banker Bruce Fireman and another peer, Greville Janner, are also supporting the complaints.

Deidre Berger, director of the Ramer institute for German-Jewish relations explained the opposition to Bauer in an interview. She claimed the magazine encouraged young people:

To have an affinity for world war two. They're glorifying the war, and leaving out completely any mention of Germany 's responsibility for the holocaust.

Der Landser is a magazine that writes about Germany's role in the war as if the people about whom it writes were not war criminals, and some of them were.

Bauer told the BBC that the magazine complied with German law. It neither trivialised nor glorified war crimes.

Update: Ofcom Investigating

7th September 2013. See  article from  independent.co.uk

Ofcom logoOfcom has announced it is in contact with German authorities as it investigates whether Kiss FM owner Bauer is a fit and proper broadcaster, after complaints that it publishes a magazine that is said to glorify German Second World War soldiers.

Ofcom has contacted Germany's Federal Review Board for Media Harmful To Minors, the censor responsible for monitoring issues such as coverage of war atrocities.

Bauer said none of its publications trivialise or glorify National Socialism or war crimes

 

 Update: Incompetent Lawmaking...

Government agrees to amend its disgraceful gagging bill


Link Here 6th September 2013  full story: Election Censorship in the UK...Government proposes widespread censorship a year before election
nick cleggA negative public reaction to the government's disgraceful lobbying bill and its effect on censoring campaign groups has led to a promise to make significant changes.

Liberal Democrat sources said the government will retreat on some parts of the lobbying bill as early as next week, after campaign groups raised serious concerns that it would have a chilling effect on their campaigns.

The news comes days after MPs attacked the bill as a dog's breakfast and a mess when it was debated for the first time in the House of Commons.

Labour attacked its sinister restrictions on campaigning by campaign groups a year before an election, while backbench Tories expressed reservations about its impact on free speech.

It is understood the government will offer to remove several controversial clauses, including ones that said campaigning could count as political if it procures success for a candidate, even if it does not endorse a specific party. Charities from Oxfam to the Royal British Legion feared this could make them subject to spending limits on political campaigning in the year before an election.

Sources close to Nick Clegg said the amendments would mean no extra charities or third parties would be caught by the restrictions, though some that faced limits in 2010 would still be affected by new limits.

Even with the promised concessions, the lobbying bill will still mean third parties are subject to tougher restrictions on political campaigning.

The Electoral Commission has warned the new spending limits could mean it would have to ask groups in breach of the law to take down blogs or stop political rallies. The watchdog said the bill would create a high degree of uncertainty.

 

 Offsite Article: Disgraceful Gagging Bill Debated in Parliament...


Link Here 5th September 2013  full story: Election Censorship in the UK...Government proposes widespread censorship a year before election
House of Commons logo Your guide to the heated debate surrounding the controversial lobbying bill that could cap charity spending. By Padraig Reidy

See article from indexoncensorship.org

 

 Update: Dictator Dave...

Cameron takes inspiration from Bongoland dictatorships and proposes vague and widespread censorship of political campaigns in the 12 months up to an election


Link Here 26th August 2013  full story: Election Censorship in the UK...Government proposes widespread censorship a year before election
the dictatorThe Electoral Commission , Britain's elections watchdog, has concluded that government plans to censor political campaigning before a general election are flawed and in part unworkable.

In a private briefing sent to interested parties, the commission says that it has significant concerns about the coalition's lobbying bill, that some parts of it may be unenforceable and that it is not at all clear how the new restrictions affecting charities will work.

When the transparency of lobbying, non-party campaigning and trade union administration bill 2013-14 was published in July, the day before MPs broke up for their summer recess, it emerged that, as well as long-expected plans for a statutory register of lobbyists, the bill includes proposals that would drastically censor campaign groups from speaking on political issues in the 12 months before a general election.

In its letter, the commission says the proposed rules about spending at constituency level may be unenforceable , partly because it will often be hard for campaigners to identify with a reasonable level of confidence when an activity has 'no significant effects' in a given constituency .

More broadly, it says the proposed rules about what constitutes election-related activity are not sufficiently clear. The briefing says:

In our view, it is not at all clear how that test will apply in practice to the activities of the many third parties that have other purposes beyond political campaigning. For instance, it seems arguable that the new test could apply to many of the activities of charities, voluntary organisations, blogs, thinktanks and other organisations that engage in debate on public policy.

John Sauven, executive director at Greenpeace , one of more than 100 charity organisations that have expressed concerns about the bill, said the legislation was the most pernicious assault on campaign groups in living memory .

A spokesman for the Electoral Commission said it had significant concerns about the bill and would be explaining them in detail to a select committee in September. The bill's second reading is on 3 September, with its three-day committee stage a week later.

 

  Parliamentary Trolling...

Yet another parliamentary inquiry into online safety


Link Here 20th August 2013

Culture, Media and Sport select committeeThe parliamentary Culture, Media and Sport Committee has announced another inquiry into Online Safety:

Despite technological innovation and an increase in public understanding of dangers, the online world continues to pose hazards, from images of child abuse to trolling. These dangers are the correlation of the immense benefits provided by unimpeded communication and free speech, so any attempts to mitigate harms have to be proportionate and, where possible, avoid disadvantageous consequences.

The Culture, Media and Sport Committee has decided to investigate a number of aspects of online safety that are currently raising concerns, in particular:

  • How best to protect minors from accessing adult content;

  • Filtering out extremist material, including images of child abuse and material intended to promote terrorism or other acts of violence;

  • Preventing abusive or threatening comments on social media.

The Committee invites written evidence from those who wish to contribute to the inquiry.

 

 Offsite Article: Anti-Trade Union bill may restrict political comment from a far wider group...


Link Here 20th August 2013  full story: Election Censorship in the UK...Government proposes widespread censorship a year before election
tuc logo Proposals in a bill slipped out as Parliament broke for the Summer will gag the TUC, trade unions and every campaign group in the country in what can only be seen as a chilling attack on free speech.

See article from touchstoneblog.org.uk

 

 Offsite Article: Banning Lads' Mags is no step forward for women...


Link Here 17th August 2013  full story: Lads Mags...Blaming lads mags for all the world's ills
karen lumley By Karen Lumley, the Member of Parliament for Redditch who sits on the All Party Parliamentary Group for Body Image.

See article from conservativehome.blogs.com

 

 Offsite Article: Anti-Social Legislation Order...


Link Here 7th August 2013
House of Commons logo A terrifying attack on our civil liberties is going through Parliament

See article from liberalconspiracy.org

 

 Update: The Censorative Party...

57% of Conservative MPs support David Cameron's internet censorship policy


Link Here 1st August 2013  full story: David Cameron's Internet Porn Ban...Attempting to ban everything on the internet

conservative party logoThe ToryDiary website writes:

Respondents were asked in our latest survey whether or not they supported David Cameron's proposals on the internet and pornography.

  • 57 per cent said that they do.
  • 27 per cent said that they don't.
  • 15 per cent said that they have no view.

This represents decisive support for the Prime Minister's proposals, which have been strongly driven by the Culture Department. It's worth adding that at this stage this is very much support in principle: we have yet to see the detail.

However Tory MPs don't seem to be lining up make their pro-censorship views known to the electorate. Perhaps too many votes to be lost.

 

  Acceptable Behavioural Standards...

Parliamentary committee calls for wide internet censorship


Link Here 31st July 2013

ecrime The House of Commons Home Affairs Committee has published a report covering a wide range of internet crime issues. This includes a couple of paragraphs calling for broad brush internet censorship:

We are deeply concerned that it is still too easy for people to access inappropriate online content, particularly indecent images of children, terrorism incitement and sites informing people how to commit online crime. There is no excuse for complacency. We urge those responsible to take stronger action to remove such content. We reiterate our recommendation that the Government should draw up a mandatory code of conduct with internet companies to remove material which breaches acceptable behavioural standards.

We note those companies that donate to the Internet Watch Foundation, and encourage them to increase their contributions. Additionally, we recommend that the Government should look at setting up a similar organisation focused on reporting and removing online terrorist content.

We are concerned to note the Minister's assertion that off the shelf hacking software is increasingly available to untrained criminals and recommend the Government funds a law enforcement team which is focused on disrupting supply.

 

 Update: Ethical Bullying...

Claire Perry seems to think that the Church of England should follow her pet morality concerns and disinvest from Google


Link Here 28th July 2013  full story: David Cameron's Internet Porn Ban...Attempting to ban everything on the internet

Clair PerryChristian campaigner and Conservative MP Claire Perry has told the Church of England to pull its money out of Google in a bid to force the company to take a stronger line over pornographic and child abuse images she claims are widely available through its search engine.

She told The Daily Telegraph:

It is quite clear that many companies, in particular British ISPs, are finally now taking a really responsible approach to this. They are seeing that we want a level of social responsibility. There are others out there who have not got that attitude.

They (the Church of England and other investors) have a role to play, they have questions to ask themselves. They are moral leaders.

Her demands follow the Archbishop of Canterbury's pledge to to review the Church's investment strategy, after very embarrassing revelations that it has holdings in firms that profit from payday lending.

In the name of pressurising organisations to do more about child abuse, then perhaps the church should also pull its investment from religious organisations too. And it's not as if political organisations are a paragon of virtue either. In fact it makes one wonder if there is anything that passes muster as totally ethically correct.

 

  Let Us Know How You Get On...

Government does not seem particularly interested in ATVOD's bizarre idea to ban card payments for online porn


Link Here 27th July 2013

House of Lords logoATVOD has the bizarre idea that online porn is likely to 'deprave and corrupt' children. Hence the Video on Demand Censor claims that the banks could ban card payments on the grounds that the porn contravenes the Obscene Publications Act.

However online porn has been available for some time and there's not much evidence of masses of depraved children. Most campaigners against online porn are more realistically concerned that it provides a bad education for children, and that boys may be learning to treat girls less respectfully than they should.

Floella Benjamin, a member of the House of Lords asked the Government this week:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the action taken by the Authority for Television on Demand (ATVOD) to ensure that United Kingdom websites providing explicit pornography keep such material out of reach of those aged under 18; and whether they will take steps to assist ATVOD in acting in relation to websites operating from outside the United Kingdom.

To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the suggestion by the Authority for Television on Demand that United Kingdom financial institutions should consider whether it is possible to decline to process payments from the United Kingdom to the operations of non-United Kingdom websites which appear to be breaking the Obscene Publications Act 1959 by allowing children to access explicit hardcore pornography.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble answered:

I welcome the work that the Authority for Television on Demand (ATVOD) has undertaken in this area to explore with UK financial institutions and card companies the possibility of declining to process payments to websites operating from outside the EU which allow under 18s in the UK to view explicit pornographic content. The protection of children online is of the utmost importance and we will watch this work with interest. ATVOD provided a report on this area to the UKCCIS executive board on July, 8th, 2013 and we look forward to receiving further reports on their progress in due course.

The reply doesn't seem to imply much pro-active support from the government, just a a vague interest to see how ATVOD gets on.

 

 Update: Moralist with No Morals...

Claire Perry threatens to use her influence to get journalist sacked after making technically illiterate claims about the hacking of her website


Link Here 25th July 2013  full story: David Cameron's Internet Porn Ban...Attempting to ban everything on the internet

Clair PerryClaire Perry acts as David Cameron's Mary Whitehouse, pushing for internet censorship in the name of 'protecting the children'.

Well her website was recently hacked and defaced with links to pornographic images.

When Guido Fawkes, a reporter and blogger, wrote about it on his website, Perry took to Twitter to ludicrously accuse him of sponsoring the hack, and publicly announced that she would be speaking to his editor at the Sun (Fawkes has a column with the tabloid) to punish him for writing about her embarrassment.

She was way out of her depth in speaking about technical details of the hack that it makes her appointment as internet censorship adviser seem very dodgy.

The accusations that Guido Fawkes had something to do with the hacking has led the blogger to consider taking her to court.

Cory Doctorow of Boing Boing noted of her conduct:

When a powerful politician threatens to get journalists fired for reporting inconvenient news, she abuses her office and acts as a public bully. Perry is perfectly awful in every single way, and has committed a major ethical breach, as well as likely violating Britain's (ridiculous) libel laws.

 

 Update: Labour 'no brainers' have a good whinge...

The Sun's Page 3 is debated in the Welsh Assembly


Link Here 11th July 2013  full story: Page 3 Girls...Miserable campaigners whinge about page 3 fun

welsh assembly logoThe issue of the Sun's Page 3 has been debated in the Welsh Assembly.

Labour member Rebecca Evans bizarrely claimed during the debate that The Sun is one of the only places left where soft pornography is accepted. She said that she supports the anti Page 3 campaign and called upon the Sun newspaper to drop the feature and emphasised that half naked women just aren't news.

Labour member Joyce Watson said that being opposed to page three is a no-brainer . She added that women are seen as desirable or maternal and still judged by appearances instead of achievements.

Plaid Cymru member Lindsay Whittle asked menacingly : is page three suitable for families to see in their own homes?

However Janet Finch-Saunders of the Conservative party said that there must be a demand for page three as it still exists and some women feel proud to show their bodies.

 

  Cultural and Community Distribution Deregulation Bill...

Parliamentary progress of bill to remove council control of leafleting via licensing: 2nd Reading in the Lords on 5th July


Link Here 7th July 2013

House of Lords logoThe Bill amends the Environmental Protection Act 1990 with respect to the distribution of printed matter for events which involve small scale performance of live music and other entertainment; and for connected purposes.

Leaflets are exempt from council fees and control where the distribution is for the purposes of an event which consists wholly or mainly of live entertainment and takes place in the presence of an audience of no more than 600 persons.

In this Schedule "live entertainment" means any of the following--

  • (a) a performance of a play,
  • (b) a performance of music,
  • (c) a performance of dance,
  • (d) a performance of comedy,
  • (e) a poetry reading,
  • (f) a magic show,
  • (g) a puppet show,
  • (h) an art exhibition,
  • (i) a film society or club event,
  • (j) live entertainment or other cultural social or recreational events of a similar nature to those falling within paragraphs (a) to (i) above.

Update: Passed 2nd Reading in the House of Lords

7th July 2013. See Hansard from publications.parliament.uk

Next to the House of Lord's Committee stage.

 

2000   2001   2002   2004   2005   2006   2007   2008   2009   2010   2011   2012   2013   2014   2015   2016   2017  
Jan-March   April-June   July-Sept   Oct-Dec   Latest  

melonfarmers icon
 

Top

Home

Index

Links

Email
 

UK

World

Media

Info

US
 

Film Cuts

Nutters

Liberty

Cutting Edge

Shopping
 

Sex News

Sex+Shopping

Advertise
 


UK News

UK TV News

UK Censor List

UK Campaigns

BBC Watch

Ofcom Watch

ASA Watch
 

IWF Watch

Extreme Porn News

Government Watch

Parliament Watch

Customs Watch

UK Press Censor Watch

UK Games Censor Watch
 


Adult DVD+VoD

Online Shop Reviews
 

Online Shops

New Releases & Offers
 
Sex Machines
Fucking Machines
Adult DVD Empire
Adult DVD Empire
Simply Adult
30,000+ items in stock
Low prices on DVDs and sex toys
Simply Adult
Hot Movies
Hot Movies