In 1987 a small underground music movement, running to the beat of a new electronic genre, and largely found in London and Manchester, was brewing into something considerably more noticeable. “Acid house”, as it became known, was about to make its mark in the UK.
De-industrialisation, unemployment, a more globally linked world, technological advances – particularly in electronics and computing – and the ready availability of ecstasy, all played their part. The scene burst into life in the summer of 1988, with a string of mostly illegal parties in fields and abandoned warehouses.
Whereas the numbers attending the events in 1987 were relatively small, by 1988 the parties were attracting many thousands, sometimes tens of thousands. Most of the parties took place during the summer months and were unified by the mantra “love, peace and unity”. It became known as the “second summer of love”, coming some 20 years after the original 1960s outpouring of hedonism.
Initially, the authorities were nonplussed. The gatherings were noisy, and often some physical damage was done. Compared to the norm for large gatherings in the preceding years though – football hooliganism, fractious industrial disputes, and the like – they were markedly peaceful. However, the parties were subversive, particularly as they were largely operating outside the law.
Licensing law at the time
The retail sale of alcohol in the late 1980s was governed by the Licensing Act 1964, but alcohol wasn’t really a feature at these parties. This arguably helped the rave organisers, at least initially, since the authorities’ reactions would almost certainly have been swifter and firmer had they been serving alcohol without a licence.
The key licensing law engaged was that relating to music and dancing licences. What organisers needed depended on the precise nature of the event and its location.
If an event was a public one – so one to which anyone had a right to go – then within greater London, the London Government Act 1963 applied; outside London it was the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982. A crucial point here was that outside greater London, open air events on private land were not licensable, unless the relevant provisions were expressly adopted by the local authority.
If the event was private, but run for profit, the Private Places of Entertainment (Licensing) Act 1967 potentially applied. Potentially because, again, the relevant provisions were only engaged if the local authority expressly adopted them. If it hadn’t adopted them, a licence was not required. In short, it was a bit of a patchwork, particularly outside London.
The maximum period any of these music and dancing licences could last was a year. Authorisations beyond around 1am for a given venue or event were almost unheard of.
Organisers’ tactics
Many of the organisers of the Acid House raves have become quite prominent – even publishing books about their activities. Suffice it to say that for the most part they broke into empty warehouses or similar locations, sometimes using forged leases and licences to put the authorities off long enough to get themselves set up.
Information about the precise location of the events was kept secret until the last minute. Typically, flyers would go out a week or so before the event, giving only basic details and the date of the party. A meeting point would later be revealed, normally on the night, via pirate radio. At that point, revellers would then be told, perhaps by someone there or via a call to a nearby phone box, where to go.
Few had mobile phones, and no one had satnav, so everyone just followed each other. The key, though, was timing. If the organisers could get enough people into the venue or site quickly enough, the authorities would struggle to shut it down. It was not uncommon for there to be two or three convoys of sound equipment going to different locations, so that the police were never sure which was the real destination.
The organisers also turned to more rural locations just outside London, now more easily accessible thanks to the newly built M25. There the site could genuinely be rented from the landowner, the authorities in the area were often more likely to be unprepared or under-resourced, and the legal framework could be more easily exploited. Some of the big organisers even used lawyers to facilitate this and had them on site to scrutinise any challenge by the authorities.
Although the authorities were initially on the back foot, they quickly got into gear, with the main focus being on preventing events from getting started. Something that they became adept at. However, they were unable to police the problems away entirely, particularly where rave culture had taken hold. The legal framework at the time did not help, but changes did come, albeit slowly.
Initial legal changes
It took the relative nimbleness of a private member’s bill, put forward by Graham Bright, to make the first significant legal inroad. That became the rather uninspiringly named Entertainments (Increased Penalties) Act 1990. Very simply it addressed the comparatively low level of the fines, and penalties, incurred for conducting events without a music and dancing licence. Notably it substantially increased fines, some as low as £200, to £20,000 (around £50,000 in today’s money). Increased intelligence, particularly as to the individuals and entities behind the events, also had a significant effect. The likes of Genesis, Telepathy and Biology, all pretty much stopped putting on raves.
The wheels of government turned more slowly, with the first piece of primary legislation being the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. This was the Act that first codified the meanings of “rave” and “electronic dance music”. Most importantly, it gave the police wider powers to shut down unlicensed raves.
Was that the end of the matter? Clearly not. In a 2001 Channel 4 documentary – The History of House Music – the head of the Metropolitan Police’s so called Acid House Squad, Ken Tappenden, said: “I think in a way we failed, because we drove it underground. And when we drove it underground there was [sic] far more dangers, and there was far more thuggery, and there was extortion.”
As is often the case, when activities are driven underground, the externalities tend to become more hazardous and haphazard.
From the early 1990s, a different approach was already being tried in some locations. Certain events and venues were being actively licensed to accommodate all-night raves. One of the first in London was Raindance at Jenkins Lane, off the A13, near Barking. Others followed. These were some of the first all-night licences. One effect was to bring the activities back into the regulatory light, and thereby the externalities could be better and more safely controlled.
What has happened since?
The broader legal framework has of course now changed, in that the licensing of music events (at least those above a certain size and outside certain hours), along with the sale by retail of alcohol, is primarily governed by the Licensing Act 2003. That has not been without its controversies, with the late licences permitted under the Act, and to a certain extent encouraged by the government at the time, being much criticised (though not always particularly rigorously).
However, we have now had a long period where nearly all the legacy events of the Acid House raves – the festivals and nightclubs purveying electronic dance music in its now myriad forms – take place lawfully. The licensing of those events and nightclubs is part of, and has galvanised the broader move towards, professionalisation and regulation, which in turn has led to better and safer events.
By way of a simple example, one need only look at security. Where security personnel were employed 30 years ago, many were little more than thugs and some were out-and-out gangsters. Successful operators realised the importance of good safe operations, but there were others who were happy to cut corners. This was specifically c0ited in the reports leading up to the enactment of the Private Security Industry Act 2001, which very simply required anyone in that role to have been trained and licensed. That brought regularisation. It brought recognition to and a degree of pride in those who did the job. Above all it improved standards in this particular corner of the industry.
Licensing is of course not a panacea. There has, for example, recently been a spike in illegal raves in London. These tend to be small scale and the rise more closely linked to the large number of nightclubs that have been shut down or closed recently – some 50% in the last 10 years, by one measure – than anything else. However, if the lawful outlets are limited, youngsters won’t just go and do something different; the genie has long been let out of the bottle. The void is often just filled by illegal operators. Providing for it, licensing it, and regularising it, are all points that should remain at the forefront of the debate and response.
In the meantime, landowners should be alive to the additional risk, and consider taking extra steps to protect their property.
Steps to take to protect your property
1. Don’t panic. Most illegal raves these days are still small and rare.
2. Make sure entry points to your property (particularly empty or disused ones), and the perimeter, are properly secured.
3. Consider installing an alarm.
4. Make use of the relatively cheap cost of CCTV.
5. Upgrade locks and window security.
6. Employ (licensed) security guards.
7. Report anything suspicious to the authorities.
James Daglish is a partner and head of the licensing team at Goodman Derrick LLP
