Sunday, October 13, 2013

Tower Hamlets vs Central Beds It gets more Amusing

Okay first the whole farcical battle at Tower Hamlets rolls into more issues. Seems the licensing committee has not recommended the policy on the way to full council. This is not the end of the process nor will it even probably change the long term plans but there is the view the council may have been a little greedy asking £9k per annum for each license. Now remembering that Westminster Council was taken to court by a sex shop over the excessive license fees and told they should charge a reasonable rate should give Tower Hamlets pause.

However this is not the end, in fact it is not even close as when the whole business goes before the council the chances are even though 97% of people are against the changes the council is still in a position to ignore what the public want.

Now Central Beds has pushed through its Nil Policy but they now have guidelines as to where any club could be located. Basically they have put down just about every area in Central Beds as there is a 500m radius of all sorts of things but the absolute best one that shows the mentality of some councilors is parks or recreational areas for or used by children under the age of 1. Now not sure how many under 1s are going to be affected by objectification or by the sight of a front of a building. Obviously every under 1 would be asking their parents what goes on in there late at night when I am asleep? I really need a sarcasm font.

Finally been having discussions about TENs which people are campaigning to have changed so any event that would require an SEV if it was regularly cannot use temporary event notices. More of the moral thought police but it raises the question how do women get to go see the Dream Boys or Chippendales etc? As the venues would need to apply for a TENs to hold the event. So no TENs for adult entertainment means no male striptease, I have checked with a couple of councils about how they license these events and been told it is TENs. So all you ladies that enjoy seeing events like the dream boys watch out as if that TENs law changes it will come bite you as well. Still nothing like radical feminism ignoring any other women so they can railroad they opinion through.

TonyN (tonyprince@acdcfan.com)

15 comments:

  1. it's TENs that helped keep Shades going for a year when it lost it's licence. They marketed it as a late night bar venue with the girls in once a month. I guess it really annoys the objectors when the clubs don't close down as they planned, which is why they want them axed. It's sounded like the Platinumn Lounge was going to do a similar thing with their lap dancing on 'tour' concept. Let's hope they don't change the law.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well I don't think those that are talking about it have any idea on the impact it will have on women and the LBGT community. A lot of their fun events, hen nights etc can only work because of TENs and if the regs are changed to stop adult entertainment it will hit a much wider set of groups than just clubs testing water or keeping going while legal challenges are made.

      Delete
    2. The radfems don't care about the wants of ordinary women and have precious little regard for the LBGT community, despite the fact that they claim to be working in the interests of all women, and many of them identify as lesbians; ALL entertainment with a sexual dimension is a manifestion of 'The Patriarchy', according to one of their pet theories.

      Delete
    3. They certainly don't care about anyone but themselves and the fact that the backlash is likely to be a lot wider than they believe just shows how blinkered their views are.

      Delete
    4. Certainly, the members of Rainbow Hamlets weren't too impressed with their efforts...

      Delete
  2. Yeah i expect that it would mean lots of other venues having to apply for SEV's to host a few events a year, or they would have to utilise existing lap dancing clubs to host their nights. Either way it's going to cost them more money and may effect the feasibility of it being worth it.
    I was wondering Tony if you knew what the situation was for 'mobile strippers', like the ones they have on hen do's who strip off in a stretched limos or converted fire engines for example. Are they covered by any regulations?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In terms of male strippers the rules seem to be ignored. I know of a venue that should require an SEV but operates anyway. Of the Limo services with female dancers the ones associated with venues are covered by their SEV license within the council boundaries. If the limo leaves those boundaries then performance is supposed to stop. Those that are independent I have no idea as they are probably not covered but I could see the police going after them if they became too popular.

      Delete
    2. Some venues with theatre licences style male stripping as a theatrical performance, and get away with it in that manner. One has to question whether local authorities would allow the law to be interpreted in such a manner if the strippers in question were female...

      Delete
    3. We have already seen with burlesque the issues of interpretation so unless someone can write a play that involves the audience giving the performers money.... lets think about that lol.

      Delete
    4. Ah yes, I'd almost forgotten about the outbreak of officious stupidity in Camden in 2009!

      Delete
    5. Officialdom, where common sense disappears up its own back side.

      Delete
    6. ...Along with a fair amount of the public's money! :-O

      Delete
  3. On the subject of Central Bedfordshire, it's very telling that the council has only moved to push through the 'nil' policy AFTER Shayler's in Ampthill found striptease to be commercially unviable, which implies that NO location within its borders could make striptease work.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The places we see the nil policy always seem to have no clubs and in all likelihood would not be financially viable.

      Delete
    2. Political smoke-and-mirrors on a budget, in other words...

      Delete