Council starts charging for child performance licences

[Golightly]

From The Stage:

Britain’s largest young performer school franchise, Stagecoach, has said it is “appalled” by Islington Council’s decision to introduce charges on licences for child actors.

The authority recently imposed a fee of £25 for processing licences, a cost that more than doubles if the application does not arrive seven working days before a youngster’s first appearance on stage.

Tarquin Shaw-Young, head of casting for Stagecoach, said he knew of three production companies that had turned down children from the borough on account of the charges, which are paid for by producers rather than parents.

Speaking to The Stage, Shaw-Young said: “I am appalled by it really. Having worked tirelessly for the last five years with lots of other people to try and change children’s licensing […] This will just throw a spanner in the works, as far as I am concerned.”

Shaw-Young, whose employer has 600 branches involving 30,000 children nationwide, said he was unaware of other local authorities imposing a standard fee.

Islington’s late submission charge was introduced in 2009 but the decision to make all applicants pay was passed late last year and is only now affecting local youngsters.

Ian Hart, chair of the National Network for Children in Employment and Entertainment, said it “appears fundamentally inappropriate” to charge for licences when the applicant gives the council the full 21-day window to process the application.

Hart, who is also the child employment enforcement and strategy manager for Surrey County Council, said “almost all” local authorities do not charge.

He added: “We are already aware of the fact that major broadcasters and other high-profile agencies and personnel who engage children have made a policy decision, and will not be using children from local authority areas where there is a charge. This widens the so-called postcode lottery further, at a time when we are at a delicate stage of negotiations with central government through their review of the outdated legislation for children engaged in entertainment. So it is disappointing.

“It is not, however, for NNCEE to criticise or to make decisions for local authorities, but yes of course, we would prefer all children to have the same opportunity, and experience shows that broadcasters particularly are very mindful of reducing unnecessary cost.”

Entertainment lawyer at Ralli Solicitors Keith Arrowsmith said there might be legal implications in Islington Council’s decision to charge a fee for all applications.

He said: “The Children (Performances) Regulations of 1968 clearly set out the mechanism to apply for a licence, including the format of the application form. The council is under a duty to issue a licence if those regulations are complied with, and it is my opinion that a parent would fully comply with the statutory application process without payment of the fee. I would be interested to see if Islington Council can provide a reason why their application form deviates from that set out in the regulations and how they justify their charge as lawful.”

An Islington spokesman said: “We make no charge for the issue of the licence itself but we do charge to cover the costs associated with the extensive background checking that safeguards a child’s welfare. We plan our work, so late applications can have a knock-on effect on our activity and costs.”

Islington Council also said the authority had seen no decrease in the number of applications being made since the charges were introduced, but that the quantity of late applications had fallen “significantly”.

Last year the coalition government pledged to update the 40-year-old rules on child licensing to ensure youngsters are not denied opportunities to perform.

Following Sarah Thane’s report into child licensing laws, a handful of working groups are being set up to address specific issues, including improving safeguarding arrangements and considering whether amateur groups should be exempt from the laws.

� Is your local authority proposing to charge for child performer licences? If so, contact newsdesk@thestage.co.uk

[nextinline]

I read this today too. We need one set of rules so that everybody knows what they are doing and no child is disadvantaged because of where they live.

[Nicola]

I understand your point, Netinline, but do remember that those up us "up North" are already disadvantaged because of where we live - I get fed up of the number of times that I hear a role either requires London residency or travelling time of less than an hour. That immediately excludes about 80% of the country!! I was reading an article last week about how few working-class Northern women make it in the industry - Hardly surprising when casting directors won't look outside the M25!!!

That said, we DO get a free 12 month license for work - how about that for irony?!

[bcnups]

I do agree it's unfair on those residents of Islington, to have a charge imposed that others are not yet required to pay. Wow, how do you qualify and get a twelve month Performing licence?

[Caroline A-C]

Perhaps if they cut down on "expenses" then councils would not need to charge so many unnecessary "charges" for services which we fund already anyway!

[nextinline]

Nicola I understand how you feel as we are outside of the M25 corridor also.

[wissymo]

12 month licence ??
is that for modelling or acting?

[islandofsodor]

I know the senior girls from dd's dance school (which is in the same area as Nicola's dd) have a 12 month licence for dance performances yet the neighbouring LEA will not consider that at all.

[livininabox]

Hi
You know it really is quite ironic how those of us in counties who get open licences (6 months for us in Derbyshire) with no extra costs, GP letters etc, are often considered too far from the big smoke to get serious offers & opportunities....justy shows noone can have it all!!

[Nicola]

And of course the other thing for those from Islington to bear in mind while they bemoan their £25 fee (presumably that's once they have actually got a job?), those of us who can't get there by simply jumping on a tube often fork out literally HUNDREDS of pounds on wasted train fares for 2-minute castings. My cheapest train fare with my railcard is £49.30!!!

How about you livininabox - how much is yours?! It sounds like you're even further north than us?!

[islandofsodor]

You can getthe slower London Midland train for £8 off peak or a bit more peak times. Dh goes down to London on the train every week and fares do vary, we have managed to book Virgin next week for £12.50

[Nicola]

...but not if you're booking the day before, which is always the case with a casting!!!

[islandofsodor]

We've always managed to get the London Midland the day before but he travels down around on a Tuesday, I am guessing you have to be there early in the day. HE goes down the day before as he starts teaching at 8.30am.

[Nicola]

ahh, yes - we're always travelling at about 3pm, and need the fast service or we'd have to leave school ever earlier!!

[wissymo]

it is £44.50 per casting for us too!! that is from stafford with a railcard....i wouldn't take the slower train as it would mean missing more school!
then as its always dark and raining when we get to london and we dont know the way its usually a taxi!!
the thing we do for our kids...
my ds hasn't been booked for anything yet!! and since we started this i have spent around £800 on it for him!
as i am typing this i am thinking i must be mad!!!!!!!!! but then i know there are people on here in the same boat....