Welcome to September (a round up)

Well been nice and quiet for a bit and to be very honest I was hoping my two last pieces would have got a response from the author or the councillor who wrote the introduction. Well now I guess we can see the two pieces must be reasonably factually correct or given the history we could have expected legal action. The fact the only challenge was on a tweet as I didn't know one of the more confusing issues with Twitter. And yes I changed the introduction as I will stand by what I write and if someone has facts that prove me wrong I will acknowledge it rather than pretend it never happened.

Okay we are now off to Woolwich where the Royal Standard Strip Pub has had dancing stopped over issues with renewing the license. Seems 3 councillors have been sitting round like schoolboys doing home work and they have all sent in the same(ish) letter with the whole what about the schools issue. It is a pub, last time I checked kids are not allowed in so how would this affect them? Is there plasma screens on the outside with the dancers being live streamed? no! Is there peep holes designed so kids can peek in? No! Does it advertise sweets or toys? No! So why do people think children would be bothered, upset or even know what is going on. Seems the pub has agreed to security to stop the 1,000s' of children beating the doors down. We look forward to seeing what is going to happen there but the renewal application is being done on the 5th so we look forward to seeing the results there.

Now up to Leeds which Chasmal has been keen on watching and Black Diamond (or Tantric Blue) never got planning permission for the expansion. This has been sought and approved, so now we have the issue of the council said I could expand so how does the license committee close the venue unless there are major infractions on the license. I always thought this would be one of the targets to go but now you have to think the licensing committee will have to target other venues. Certainly seems joined up Government has maintained the standards I knew when I was in Local Government.

And it seems there will be another interesting licensing committee meeting on the 5th as Shades is up for renewal. After the dropping of the judicial review it will be interesting to see what the opposition come up with now. We hope that all the patrons are sending in letters of support and that the council realise if the judicial review was dropped that would have been on legal advice. So long as Shades trades within its license I have a suspicion the council would have a hard time in court about closing the place. Wishing the Shades crowd all the best!
Edit Letters of objection or support should be in by 5th September. So post now!


Well I couldn't write this without joining in the MileyGate Debate. Notice that a lot of the feminist commentators had to avoid slut shaming tactics as they decry that as an attack on women so suddenly we get cultural appropriation... which is when white people act black as far as the commentators describe. Now not an expert on this but Elvis was attacked for cultural appropriation in the 50s (plus the hips) so 60 years later we seem to have got no further. Why didn't someone say this back when Vanilla Ice came onto the scene. Seriously I am no fan of her music and really don't care about what she did with Thicke but looking round for excuses to have a go at the girl without slut shaming is amusing (if it wasn't such old hat). So another disney girl sheds her wholesome image, Britney and Christina both of whom have moved on. These women are old enough to make up their own minds and just because it doesn't fit with the view some people have they are still exercising free choice so get a grip people.

TonyN (tonyprince@acdcfan.com)

Shades Up Before the Beak

So here's the thing, Shades in Leamington lost their license after a local councillor got some religious people to protest about the club and 600 signatures were put on a petition. No consultation just the removal of a license.

Well Leamington a hearing in Birmingham last month found there was reason to grant a judicial review.

As mention previously Jonathan Chilvers is a Christian and green party member. Yet the green party are pretty relaxed about sexuality so it is not the party stance but a personal and religious stance we are seeing from Mr Chilvers.

The Hindu Temple focuses on how many days it is open.... think the clue there is days. Not sure that sexually aroused men are really the threat Vik Tara thinks but of course we all know the smear tactics that are used against the clubs.

As the owner of Shades pointed out certain parties just want to take away people's livelihoods and close a legitimate business. The Police and environmental protection have no objections. So lets hope they get a judge who recognises that Shades has done everything correctly.

Good luck Shades in June.

Leamington Spa Part 2 ......But We Won!!!

So the title gives it away, but before we go on to celebrate, lets take a closer look at the antics of All Saints Church, particularly their petition on Change.org.

The petition letter is lengthy and I will only refer to the parts of it that are absurd.

Greetings,

I just signed the following petition addressed to: Warwick District Council.

Impose a "Nil Cap" on Sexual Entertainment Venues

We, the undersigned, call upon Warwick District Council to impose a “Nil Cap” on the number of Sexual Entertainment Venues (SEVs) within the WDC area, to apply to future SEV applicants.

We support a Nil Cap on SEVs for the following reasons:

1. Community safety, welfare and cohesion

Leamington Spa and Warwick have evolved over centuries to comprise of many mixed use spaces where retail and industrial premises are located alongside residential areas and community amenities. There are very few spaces where an SEV would not have an impact on nearby stakeholders.

WDC recognises in its own SEV policy that SEVs can cause disturbance, anti-social behaviour and a fear of crime. Police in Newquay recently reported that the presence of strip clubs had contributed to rapes and other forms of sexual assaults in the area (The Daily Telegraph, May 23 2012). Objectors to both the recent “Shades” and “Amara” SEV applications in 2012 cited incidents of being intimidated and/or threatened by sex industry patrons. This is especially relevant for the elderly, the disabled and women, the latter of whom may be more likely to be victims of a sexual assault in the vicinity of SEVs than other urban areas (The Lilith Project, 2007).

A nil cap would reassure residents that WDC regards the safety and welfare of community members as an utmost priority.
The above paragraph is a great example of either flawed reasoning or deliberate hysteria. 'Shades' had no issues with violence or anti-social behaviour associated with it all and by invoking Newquay, they fail to mention that the police when pressed had no evidence for assertion about clubs and rape. If anyone had been intimidated in the vicinity of Shades, then maybe they should have reported it to the police, that way their objections would have had substance, but once again as we have seen in so many cases, its all anecdotal. Perhaps the most amazing thing is that Lilith is still being quoted, but almost everyone knows now what garbage it is.

2. Economic growth and prosperity

Many local businesses are struggling to survive in the midst of a double dip recession. The sex industry unfairly tarnishes broader areas with an image of sleaze, prostitution, crime and degradation. This reputation drives away trade from areas which depend on a welcoming, family friendly image to attract custom. Research from the Local Government Association in 2012 supports this, indicating that 76% of council officers surveyed blamed strip clubs for undermining high street economic growth.

A nil cap would reassure local businesses that WDC is committed to supporting economic growth, particularly in the more deprived areas of the district which require regeneration.
I do not know why people associate lap dancing clubs with the sex industry, actually I do know why, it sounds dramatic and creates images of prostitution and trafficking, which as we know are bullshit. I would love to see this much quoted sentence 76% of council officers blame strip clubs for undermining high street growth. What metrics were applied to reach this solution? Almost certainly none apart from maybe one that deals with ignorance and bigotry.

3. Historical and contemporary character

Every year, millions of domestic and international tourists come to visit the West Midlands “Shakespeare” country. Tourists frequently include a day trip to Leamington Spa to enjoy its Regency-era splendour and award winning gardens, and Warwick to visit the castle, tea rooms and race course (amongst other attractions). Period dramas such as the BBC’s “Upstairs Downstairs” have chosen Leamington Spa as a location specifically because of its beautifully preserved Belgravia-style Georgian architecture and Victorian gardens.
Well I somehow doubt that lap dancers will somehow be seen performing in the background during the next episode of Upstairs Downstairs.

The presence of the sex industry lowers the public reputation of the surrounding district. The negative publicity brought upon the area by WDC’s decision to grant an SEV licence to “Amara” has left residents – who pay a substantial financial premium to live in such a desirable area – feeling disenfranchised by WDC’s decision to let the sex industry tarnish the town in which they live.
A nil cap would reverse this trend and act to preserve the historical grandeur and sophistication traditionally associated with the WDC area.

In terms of the reputation of the surrounding district, I have to say that if the protesters and church had kept quiet, no one outside Leamington Soa would even know Shades and Amara even exist. So don't blame innocent parties for something that you started off.

The rest of the letter goes on about their desire for a 500 metre radius exclusion zone for clubs and we dealt with that piece of stupidity yesterday.

Anyway, back to the story. John wrote into the councils Licensing Team with a detailed letter that supported Shades (third) License application. Let's have John take up the story....

Amazingly against all the odds the Leamington Shades SEV application has been approved 3rd time lucky. Really wasn't expecting that! It's quite interesting that they have specified which Cllrs voted for or against. See press article here.

This time they did include my solitary letter of support, which I have been informed that they spent a long time discussing the points I raised at the hearing (just goes to show that it is worth writing in). There was also a petition supporting the club too and approval from the police. There were some 50+ objections a lot using common themes like it being a residential area but then going on to say that there will be a number of 24 hour religious festivals that will take place at the nearby temple. That's a bit of a contradiction of arguments as if it's a residential area then surely there can be no 24 hour parties either. Appears to me they were grasping at straws with that one to try and make out that there was never a time when the club could operate when the temple was closed. Also had to love the ones that used the excuse of feeling unsafe walking past the club to access the boxing club! Really? The classic case of violence is fine but nudity is bad!

Really poor objection letters on the whole with a lot of copy and pasting.

John makes a very important point early in the above paragraph. It is absolutely worth writing in to support club licence applications and it seems as if his contribution may have helped swing the balance in favour of Shades.

Predictably there has been local fallout. Reverend Wilson of All Saints Parish Church described the decision to grant the licence as a 'slap in the face for Leamington' and an 'affront to democracy'. I find his second comment to be the most amusing, his idea of democracy must the council doing as he tells them, but like Rachel Reeves in Leeds, he has found that Licensing Committees take their job seriously and most of all are absolutely not fools.

Outrageously, the article claims that the prohibitionist campaign had 'more than 600 signatures'. Well below is a frame grab taken from the petition site today (18th August 2012).



Well as you can see its actually more than 390, which is a significant difference and represents a departure from the truth, but the truth was never a comfortable bed fellow for the prohibitionists.

So, a victory for common sense and a defeat for religious inspired bigotry, but before we go I would like to share with you a frame grab I spotted on the churches petition website.



Let's put aside the fact that Paul Gilligan doesn't understand what goes on inside a club. Let's focus on his belief that 'sex is not entertainment'. Well Paul, if sex isn't entertainment, what is it? You must have a really horrible sex life if that's what you believe and furthermore, like an alarming number of prohibitionists, you can't spell.

Leamington Spa Part 1 - A Hard Battle To Be Fought

As I have said many times, StrippingTheIllusion is very much dependant upon its members as they are kind enough to send me stories and other information that I would probably otherwise miss. John Ridgley is one of these people and as you may know contributed a great article about the trials and tribulations of two clubs in Leamington Spa - Amara and Shades. John wrote a great article for us some weeks ago which can be found here. Since that time John has been keeping me up to date with what has been happening and I decided that it is time to aggregate everything into an article. I will quote extensively from Johns e-mails in this piece.

For those of you unfamiliar with the story, 'Shades' was Leamington Spas only lap dancing club and had been happily trading since 2008, without I might add any problems or complaints, that was until the council adopted the SEV legislation and Shades lost its licence. In the interim, a nightclub called 'Amara' made a successful application, which made everyone wonder what the councils problem with 'Shades' was.

John emailled me with an update in late July and filled in some gaps....

I've got a couple of updates with the Leamington lap dancing scene (or lack of). Finally the minutes from Club Amara committee have been posted on Warwick Districts web site, see item 4 pdf here.

Interestingly the club is to feature male dancers and comedy drag acts as well as female lap dancers. Not sure if it was this that tipped the balance in favour of it getting it's licence but it certainly negates a lot of the feminist arguments. They still haven't announced when club Amara is going live but at least their web site has been updated, just a shame there is no info on there! http://www.amara.co/

I found it interesting that by having a mix of entertainment that could appeal to the LGBT community, that the license was granted. 'Amara's successful application was a move in the right direction, but what about 'Shades'?

On a more negative note last week there was another regulatory committee, to amend the Warwick Districts current SEV refusal criteria (see item 5 pdf on the same link above) and it appears they have shifted the goal posts considerably. It's very obvious to me that they have tailored this new policy specifically against the new Shades application, especially the part that now adds 'proximity of other sex establishments'. I can just see it now, being rejected because of Amara. Also they have criteria such as 'whether there is planned regeneration in the area' that can then be targeted against Amara when it has to re-apply for it's licence next year . . Marvellous! Could they be going for the double take-down?

This is like a gradual chipping away from objecting councillors who failed with their nil cap campaign, so instead they are going to make it near impossible for a club to get approved anywhere by setting this ridiculously tough criteria via the back door. Looks like my hopes of getting my favourite club Shades back in full operation are pretty slim now. I sent in a very comprehensive letter of support last week, to the licensing team and all the councillors on the panel. As with previous letters I have not even received an acknowledgement of receipt or anything back, wouldn't surprise me if it just got deleted. There seems to be no mechanism in place for supporters to have their say on the matter, with all precedence given to the objectors, which is very worrying.

John is right, it is very worrying, but what was the change in the SEV refusal criteria? Well it went from being kind of what you might expect.....

The issue here is the phrase 'close proximity', which without clarification is meaningless. Everyone has their own idea of distance and the phrase is therefore entirely subjective in this context. That said, given that most venues don't open until 9.00pm at the earliest, the issue with schools, churches and parks is irrelevant and surely if proximity to a residential area is an issue, it needs to be an issue with any venue that serves alcohol.

Still, as I said, the council then decided to tighten their criteria to this....

You can see why John was concerned, because this essentially comes across as a 'Nil Policy' by stealth. Things were not looking for 'Shades' in terms of its impending licence re-application...

Another factor that was problematic was the involvement of local religious bigots, who were dead set against  any club at all being able to trade in Leamington Spa. John engaged one of them here. That said there were other church reactionaries in the frame as well, because All Saints Parish Church decided to run a petition and that aimed to press the council into implementing a 'Nil Policy'. They also decided that the 'close proximity' issue needed to be addressed as well and therefore we see....

500 metres?

I decided to look at the implications of their demand and produced a map, so you can see the extent to which they were/are trying to implement their own 'Nil Policy' by stealth.

If the exclusion zone was centred around All Saints Church, well as you can see it encompasses virtually all of Leamington Spa and 'Shades' and 'Amara'. But remember the church wanted more that one zone, as their idea was that no club should be allowed within anywhere where people live, worship or go to school. As it stands there could be so many exclusion zones that almost half the county would be included. I admit I was surprised that they didn't specify a vertical dimension as well, just in case someone opened a club in an airship.

Well as you can see, things did not look good. Shades made its third application with the combined might of every prohibitionist and religious person in the town against it.

What happened though?

Well you're going to have wait until tomorrow and Part 2 because I am somewhat busy at the moment...