TRAVELLING PERFORMERS
105. We have been told that a number of travelling
performers, who historically were not required to hold licences,
must now either use the TENs system or gain premises licences
for every site that they visit.[154]
The most high profile example of this is circuses, but Punch and
Judy, street theatre and other small variety shows are also affected.[155]
106. The circus industry has explained clearly to
us the difficulties caused by applying a static licensing system,
based on licensing a premises, to a moving entertainment. Mr Malcolm
Clay, Secretary of the Association of Circus Proprietors of Great
Britain, explained to us: "We have been faced with a different
premises licence every week for a 40-week season, whereas your
local pub or club has one licence application to make".[156]
107. We have also heard evidence that there is a
lack of consistency amongst licensing authorities. Some believe
that they are licensing the circus tent, others the ground on
which it will sit. Other licensing authorities have come to the
conclusion that circuses are not licensable at all. This variation
in decision making has caused much uncertainty in the industry:
"It is the inconsistency which is the problem
because you can go to a town where the licensing officer says,
"No, don't worry. I don't want an application," and
then perhaps the next week you go seven miles down the road into
the next borough and you have to be licensed because the officer
is not as flexible".[157]
108. Much of the confusion seems to stem from the
fact that a circus per se is not a licensable activity.[158]
The Government's own guidance to licensing authorities makes it
clear that it is the inclusion of certain entertainment within
a circus performance, involving music and dancing, which might
make it licensable.[159]
If these activities are merely "incidental" to the main
entertainment, then there is no need for a licence.[160]
The guidance only suggests that music and dancing is "likely"
to be the main attraction on offer at a circus.[161]
This means that the licensing officer and authority can use their
judgement to decide where the boundary between incidental and
integral lies, leaving scope for licensing authorities to come
to different decisions regarding the same circus.
109. Circus proprietors have argued to us that there
is no good reason for circuses to be included in the licensing
regime at all.[162]
Only one circus serves alcohol, and as a family entertainment
circus performances end relatively early in the evening, and are
unlikely to be a source of public disorder.[163]
The industry also argues that in many ways they are no different
from a travelling fairground, about whom the guidance states:
"at fairgrounds, a good deal of the musical entertainment
may be incidental to the main attractions and rides at the fair
which are not themselves regulated entertainment".[164]
Zippos Circus used an example of a recent performance in Birmingham
which took place without music and dancing to contend that such
activities are incidental in circuses.[165]
110. On balance we believe that it is right for circuses
to be part of the licensing regime. However we agree with the
circus industry that consultation with them in advance of the
Licensing Act was extremely poor. Circuses were initially led
to believe that they would not be covered by the Act.[166]
By the time circuses were told that it was likely that their performances
would be licensable it was too late for proper consultation to
take place in advance of the publication of the bill.[167]
111. The Association of Circus Proprietors estimates
that its members have had to apply for over 100 full premises
licences for every 3 year touring cycle.[168]
For small mostly family-run businesses this represents a considerable
administrative burden. Even the requirement to display prior public
notices of the premises licence application can be onerous when
the distance between touring locations is considered.
112. If the weather means that a particular site
cannot be used, or there is some other unforeseen circumstance,
circuses either have to apply for a TEN, with its number restrictions,
or travel to a venue for which they do have a valid licence which
might be in a completely different city. Mr Martin Burton, Founder
Director of Zippos Circus, explained the difficulties caused when
extreme flooding in Sheffield meant that after travelling from
Twickenham Zippos Circus was unable to use the park site in Sheffield
for which it had a licence:
"Pre licensing what I would have done was
I would have phoned up Meadowhall shopping centre and moved my
circus from the council park to Meadowhall. It would have required
me to alter my advertising at the very last minute, but that is
my job and that is my expertise […]. However, because of
the Licensing Act 2003 we had to turn round. I literally had lorries
coming off the motorway onto the slip road and I told them to
go back onto the motorway and back to London. The only place we
had a premises licence that we could use was for Barnes in London.
So we went all the way back to Barnes and opened in Barnes. I
have told you how I can re-advertise, but it is one thing to re-advertise
the change of location from one part of Sheffield to another,
it is another thing to advertise a change in location from Sheffield
to Barnes. That caused us real hardship and we lost serious money
that week, plus the next venue was Perth in Scotland and the idea
of Sheffield was it is half way to Perth. I then drove from Barnes
to Perth without a break, which was another extremely expensive
exercise".[169]
113. Circuses are not the only travelling entertainers
to find that complying with the requirements of the Licensing
Act has led to complications and expense. Equity told us that
TENs are now required for Punch and Judy shows and other small
variety shows across the country.[170]
114. Many of the difficulties about licensing experienced
by travelling entertainers could have been avoided if the Government
had consulted them appropriately before the implementation of
the Act. The Act applies a premises-based licensing system, primarily
designed to deal with larger commercial pubs and clubs serving
alcohol, to peripatetic, often small scale activities. We recommend
that the Government should consult on the possibility of amending
Statutory Guidance to exempt some forms of low-risk, small-scale
travelling entertainment such as Punch and Judy shows from the
requirement to obtain a licence. Where a licence is required we
recommend that a portable licence, of the type issued to cruise
ships, should be issued by the home authority where the operator
is based. In setting the fee level for a portable licence the
Government should have regard to the fact that operators have
already incurred significant costs in applying for premises licences
under the current regime.
146 
