Westminster Council Flyering ban

AnthonyMiller

Greetings Moneysavers,

I wondered if any of you would be interested in signing the petition against the
Westminster City Council flyering ban
I cannot tell you where to find it on the internet as that would be advertising but it's not hard to find...

The effect of this and similar bans is to push up the cost of advertising for promoters and small businesses.
This increase in cost will be passed on to you as a consumer.
And/or result in price fixing cartels.
It also increases unemployment both among comedians and the casual workers employed in the street advertising industry which is gradually being outlawed in any mass population centers. In any proscribed non-flyering zone individuals and promoters can now be fined £75-2500 or forced to buy a licence to flyer (if they are allowed to at all). Councils can and do also vet promoters and lobby and pressure groups literature for politcal ends.
Plane Stupid, the WI, Environmental protesters and 8 cats called fluffy have been caught under the Environment Act 2005 and given £80 fines.
Assuming you consume live comedy or go into any shop or use any service
which relies on any form of street advertising to make its existance visible then this affects you.

Unlike other such bans enforced under the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 ....

(Section 23 inserted a section into the Environmental Protection Act 1990. The relevant section of the EPA 1990 is 94B and schedule 3A - To give the power to local authorities to fine promoters for littering BEFORE IT HAPPENS.)

...the Westminster ban is enforced entirely by threatening licencees with licence revocation
and inserting obscure subclauses into liquor licences that the police have told us
are not law but would cost a fortune to challenge in court in the mean time of which
anyone who had had their licence revoked would be stuck paying business rates on
a venue they were not allowed to use.

There is more information out there on the web about this ban but I'm not going to tell you
where to find it as that would probably constitute advertising.

However, this is just one example of the BID levy system allowing big businesses to attack their small business rivals. Local Government acts are another fun source of repressive legislation.

The most Recent City of Westminster Bill has been petitioned against not just by comedians but by The Pedlars Resource Centre, The National Market Traders’ Federation and
London Evening Standard and Associated newspapers.

Theresa May recently gave a speech outlining the government's plans to scrap
some of these laws - including the "litter regulations" as part of a strategy
to remove the most oppressive parts of the ASBO system.

There is also an "idea" submitted to the Government "yourfreedom" Freedom consultation exercise website
which you can also seek out if you are curious enough...

Of course if you think that Westminster Council are sensible or that this is actually a good idea then it would not be sensible to sign the petition or vote for the "idea"...

Cheers

Anthony Miller

P.S. Yes, I do run a club but I'm not going to tell you where it is - that would be advertising.

adouglasmhor

I think you can post a link to a petition on the thread, a petition is not advertising as such. Maybe PM a board guide for info.

AnthonyMiller

It is at londonisfunny dot com backslash petition

Cheers

adouglasmhor

Signed as promised. - I think you can't post links as you are new. It's an anti spam thing.

I will stick it in and if I am wrong a mod can sort it and me out.

http://www.londonisfunny.com/petition#petitionform

If you want a couple of recommendations for comics from up here I know a few just starting out who do a good slot.

Hammyman

You won't get my vote. I hate the bloody things. Sick to death of coming to my car to find something shoved under the wiper. Its in the gutter along with those posters people slap up.

dmg24

Hammyman wrote: »

You won't get my vote. I hate the bloody things. Sick to death of coming to my car to find something shoved under the wiper. Its in the gutter along with those posters people slap up.

Am in agreement with Hammyman - they are about as annoying as those charity collection leaflets I get through the door on a near daily basis.

AnthonyMiller

Hammyman wrote: »

You won't get my vote. I hate the bloody things. Sick to death of coming to my car to find something shoved under the wiper. Its in the gutter along with those posters people slap up.

Technically that is littering - what they Environment Act 2005 was supposedly designed to combat.
I suggest you complain to your Council who have the police powers to fine anybody within a
controlled zone (which they can define) £75 to £2500 for a repeated offense.
They do not need to use policemen to apply the law either - any selected group of Council employees (so long as they do not hold a politically voted for post) can be designated with the powers to fine individuals littering.

However, the point is that if you want to flier an event (defined as handing a piece of paper to a person who actually wants it) in certain areas this is completely banned and you cannot do it even if you are willing to pay the council.
In Birmingham for example there is a complete blanket ban on all street advertising despite the local Business Investment District spokesman Mike Olley openly attacking the council with the words

"Our members pay an extra levy on our rates. We use £150,000 of this to pay for enhanced street cleaning. We feel the leaflets and flyers add to the buoyancy and energy of Broad Street at night. By 3am the street is littered with the things, but by 6am they are all swept up."

It should be perfectly possible for the councils to prosecute promoters who create litter using their own promotional literature.
Instead of which they seek to impose complete blanket bans.

In response to the other comment about junk mail - these blanket bans will of course increase the volume of junk mail as junk mail is exempted from the anti-flyering laws. Sending out junk mail is, of course, untargeted (unlike street flyering) which means that you have to use even more paper distribution.

This is NOT a campaign against irresponsible flyering/littering - it is about the impact/effect of imposing a blanket ban on freedom of speech and social mobility.

Of course party politicians are exempted from these laws themselves and can still accost you endlessly in public places.
Charity and Religous groups are exempted too.
Pressure groups are theoretically exempted but in reality they are still fined as very few people actually understand the 2005 law as it has been rolled out local authority by local authority at a time as it is so deeply unpopular.

stclair

I dont blame the council.

As its the council who has to clean them up off the floor when people drop them etc.

AnthonyMiller

There would be some merit in that arguement if the law were allowed to be applied by the police rather than the councils which would allow the law to be applied equally to everyone. And if the law were applied equally accross the UK - but at the moment, in theory, I can send a whole army of people to flyer Westminster with no political comeback as my club is 300 m outside their remit.

In reality however ... as the law is applied by council officials who have police powers the law is applied SELECTIVELY.
The result is that there are as many flyerers in Westminster as there used to be - probably more.
They all just work for ONE person.

Despite putting in multiple FOI requests to Westminster Council asking them why nobody from the club in question has been fined £75-2000 and no official no-flyering zone has been set up we get no answer.

Allowing one person a complete monopoly on one form of advertising surely amounts to a controlled market rather than a free market.
Indeed it could be said to constitute an ecconomic war by the Council on the comedy circuit as a whole.

Also, given that the laws to fine people for flyering exist why is it neccessary to threaten licencees with revocation when the legislation exists to fine actual promoters and workers?

In some cases the only way to enforce against irresponsible behaviour is to completely ban.

In what cases.
If I hire someone to flier a gig and they leave loads of flyers around or dont clear up after themselves
how is it difficult to identify the person responsible for distributing the fliers when they must have
the details of the promoter on them by definition to be of any use to anyone...?

If you completely ban forms of social activity you will ulitmately end up criminalising ordinary people.
This, surely, will have the effect of creating a black ecconomy that feeds organised crime?
The authorities know this so there are in reality no such things as blanket ban zones.
There are zones where flyering is licenced at exhorbitant rates.
Or zones where people flout the law but aren't convicted because the council cannot or will not enforce it.
For the law to work requires eyes on the street and the one cost-benefit analysis that's ever been done
suggests that the enforcement is actually unecconomic.

As well, how come you are still complaining about aggressive flyering and littering when the law has been on the statute book since 2005?
The answer is that either the law is technically unenforcable
Or
The local authorities dont want to enforce it properly for political reasons
(like they have sold your city center to a Business Investment District PPP)
Or
Both?