MP urges Government to protect live music venues from new neighbours' complaints
Housebuilders should face having their plans blocked if they fail to protect live music venues, an MP has suggested.
Dame Caroline Dinenage has proposed letting decision-makers take into account existing properties, when they grant or refuse permission for new projects.
The Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee chairwoman warned that "live music's in crisis, the Government needs to be listening" as she proposed a new clause to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill.
Dame Caroline, the Conservative MP for Gosport, told the Commons: "It isn't about venues versus developers.
"It's about making sure we have a balance right between building enough good homes and making sure the places we're building keep the things that make life worth living.
"In Westminster and our constituencies, everyone agrees that our high streets have been in decline, so it's vitally important that we protect the places that are special to us, our constituents and our communities, the places that provide a platform for our creators and our world-beating creative industries where we can make memories, celebrate and have fun."
Dame Caroline called on the Government to let town halls and ministers rule on plans "subject to such conditions that would promote the integration of the proposed development of land with any existing use of land, including such conditions as may be necessary to mitigate the impact of noise on the proposed development".
A similar principle already exists in national planning rules, known as the National Planning Policy Framework, to ease pressure on existing businesses which "should not have unreasonable restrictions placed on them as a result" of newer builds.
But the Music Venue Trust's annual report last year warned that, in 2023, 22.4% of venues closed as a result of "operational issues", compared with 42.1% of its members reporting "financial issues".
The Trust identified noise abatement orders or other neighbour disputes as being among the issues which have resulted in permanent closures.
"Consistent application of the 'agent of change' principles will de-risk and speed up planning and development," Dame Caroline told MPs, and added that her proposal was "good for venues" and "good for developers and new neighbours".
She said the law change could help authorities stop "expensive and often pointless bun fights" when neighbours complain about noise.
She continued: "It'll make sure the needs of an existing cultural venue are considered from the start and it will save developers from late-stage objections and lengthy expensive legal disputes down the line."
Dame Caroline said music venues "are the foundation of our world-beating creative industries and also very important for our local communities", and that they had been placed "under threat, including from our disruptive planning system and our onerous licensing regime".
The Commons select committee recommended last year that the "agent of change" principle should be put on a statutory footing, to protect grassroots music venues.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
Racing tax: What is it and why is the sport going on strike
For the first time in the modern history of the sport in Britain, its participants will voluntarily go on strike for a day. A day of protest will be held in Westminster. What does that mean? It means there will be no racing in Britain on September 10. The meetings scheduled for Lingfield, Carlisle, Uttoxeter and Kempton that day will not take place. They have been rescheduled to other dates. And why has all this come about? The strike announcement has come as part of British racing's 'Axe the Racing Tax' campaign, which is urging the Government to axe the Treasury's proposal to bring existing online betting duties into one single rate. Why would tax rises be so bad? Economic analysis commissioned by the British Horseracing Authority has shown that aligning the current tax rate paid by bookmakers on racing with that of online games of chance could see a £330 million revenue hit to the industry in the first five years, putting 2,752 jobs at risk in the first year alone. Strike action will surely cost the sport money? It will, it is estimated it will cost around £200,000 in lost revenue on the day. So does the racing industry support the strike move? In a word, yes. Racecourses, owners and trainers are all in agreement. The National Trainers Federation said cancelling fixtures was 'a huge sacrifice' which 'should serve as a stark reminder to the Government of the impact its tax raid will have on our sport'. Is this is a one-off, or will there be more strikes? No more strikes are planned, as things stand. Can I still have a bet anywhere that day? Yes, there will actually be one meeting in Ireland, at Cork. Irish racing is run completely separately to British racing.
South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
Rail campaigners say potential 5.5% fares rise would be ‘ripping off' passengers
July's Retail Prices Index (RPI) measure of inflation – which is often used to determine increases in the cost of train travel – will be announced on Wednesday. The Government has not confirmed how it will determine the cap in regulated fare rises for 2026, but this year's 4.6% hike was one percentage point above RPI in July 2024. Banking group Investec has forecast this year's July RPI figure will be 4.5%, which means fares could jump by 5.5%. Bruce Williamson, spokesman for pressure group Railfuture, told the PA news agency 'it would be outrageous' if fares rose by that much. He said: 'What would be the justification for jacking up fares above inflation? There isn't any. 'It's ripping off the customer, driving people off the trains and onto our congested road network, which is in no-one's interest.' Mr Williamson said he would support the Government marking its nationalisation of train operators by freezing fares. He continued: 'One would hope that there would be some efficiency savings and economies of scale that you get from having a more integrated railway. 'But of course, I strongly suspect that if there are any savings to be had, they'd be swallowed up by the Treasury and not passed back to the passengers, which I think is wrong.' Ben Plowden, chief executive of lobby group Campaign for Better Transport, said: 'Rising fares are not just burdening passengers, they are putting people off rail travel. 'Our survey found that 71% of people would be more likely to take the train if fares were cheaper. 'Public support for nationalisation plummets if fares continue to rise, so as the Government progresses plans for Great British Railways (GBR), it must take the opportunity to reform fares and make rail travel more affordable.' GBR is an upcoming public sector body that will oversee Britain's rail infrastructure and train operation. About 45% of fares on Britain's railways are regulated by the Westminster, Scottish and Welsh Governments. They include season tickets on most commuter journeys, some off-peak return tickets on long-distance routes, and flexible tickets for travel around major cities. The Department for Transport (DfT) said there will be an update on changes to regulated fares later this year. Operators set rises in unregulated fares, although these are likely to be very close to regulated ticket increases because their decisions are heavily influenced by governments. A DfT spokesperson said: 'The Transport Secretary has made clear her number one priority is getting the railways back to a place where people can rely on them. 'The Government is putting passengers at the heart of its plans for public ownership and Great British Railways, delivering the services they deserve and driving growth. 'No decisions have been made on next year's rail fares but our aim is that prices balance affordability for both passengers and taxpayers.'
South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
Racing calls one-day strike over proposed betting tax rise
The four scheduled fixtures at Carlisle, Uttoxeter, Lingfield and Kempton will not take place after agreements between the owners of the courses and the British Horseracing Authority, making it the first time the sport has voluntarily refused to race in modern history. The BHA set up the 'Axe the Racing Tax' campaign in response to proposals to replace the existing three-tax structure of online gambling duties with a single tax, with fears the current 15 per cent duty on racing could be increased to the 21 per cent levied on games of chance. Brant Dunshea, chief executive at the British Horseracing Authority, said: 'We have decided to take the unprecedented decision to cancel our planned racing fixtures on September 10 to highlight to Government the serious consequences of the Treasury's tax proposals which threaten the very future of our sport. 'British racing is already in a precarious financial position and research has shown that a tax rise on racing could be catastrophic for the sport and the thousands of jobs that rely on it in towns and communities across the country. 'This is the first time that British racing has chosen not to race due to Government proposals. We haven't taken this decision lightly but in doing so we are urging the Government to rethink this tax proposal to protect the future of our sport which is a cherished part of Britain's heritage and culture. 'Our message to Government is clear: axe the racing tax and back British racing.' The four tracks involved are operated by the Jockey Club and the Arena Racing Company, with both backing the move. Jim Mullen, CEO at the Jockey Club, said: 'We hope this pause for reflection will enable the Government to truly understand the economic impact of horseracing and its cultural significance to communities across the UK, as well as the world-class racing festivals we host. 'After this period of reflection, we hope the full implications will be understood, and we can prevent the irreparable damage that threatens a sport the nation is, and should be, proud of.' Martin Cruddace, CEO at ARC, added: 'We have always been taxed and regulated differently, and it is imperative for our future that we continue to be so. 'If the Government wants Britain to be a world leader in online casino and a world pauper in a sport at the heart of its culture, then tax harmonisation will achieve that aim.' While the four meetings will be rescheduled, Paul Johnson, chief executive of the National Trainers Federation, underlined the 'sacrifice' in calling a halt to the sport for a day. He said: 'Cancelling fixtures is a huge sacrifice by racing and should serve as a stark reminder to the Government of the impact its tax raid will have on our sport. 'Thousands of jobs are at stake alongside the loss of millions of pounds to the British economy.' A Treasury spokesperson said: 'We are consulting on bringing the treatment of online betting in line with other forms of online gambling to cut down bureaucracy – it is not about increasing or decreasing rates, and we welcome views from all stakeholders including businesses, trade bodies, the third sector and individuals.'
