The Governments view on Street Hypnosis Law in the UK

I know it’s tedious but like the road traffic act insisting you drive on the left in the UK – you ignore the law concerning Stage and Street Hypnosis at your peril.

Although not conclusive by any means the document below is way more informative than the majority of so-called legal knowledge out there. Mainly because I did what no one else has and asked my MP to find out what the 1952 Hypnotism act actually and it’s attending documents, actually means to the performing hypnotist in the UK.

Getting sick to the back teeth with the whole “I know what the law means even though I have no legal training nor have I took any advice,” thing, I did the obvious, to me anyway, and contacted my Member of Parliament who wrote to the House of Commons Library on my behalf.

The full wording from the document is below and the actual doc in pdf format can be downloaded here…

The general conclusion seems to be that street hypnosis is busking and as such does not need a licence – unless there is a local by-law specifically insisting on one and that cling it research in a pub would be seen as dubious by the courts.

If you’re interested more than that read on….

To Paul Harvey [pp] Richard Younger-Ross MP.
From Philip Ward
Home Affairs Section
House of Commons Library
[re: John Shaw the Hypnotist under the name Jonathan Chase ]

“A constituent, a practising hypnotist, has written to you seeking an interpretation of the Hypnotism Act 1952. I understand that his concern springs from the activities of “street hypnotist” who may fall outside any licensing regime.

This information is provided to Members of Parliament in support of their parliamentary duties and is not intended to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. Is should not be relied upon as legal or professional advice, or as a substitute for it. A suitably qualified professional should be consulted if specific advice or information is required.

The Hypnotism Act 1952 makes it a criminal offence to conduct hypnotism for public entertainment unless an appropriate license has been issued. Section 2 of the Act, as amended, states:

No person shall give an exhibition, demonstration or performance of hypnotism on an living person at or in connection with an entertainment to which the public are admitted, whether on payment or otherwise, at any place, unless

(a) The controlling authority have authorised that exhibition, demonstration or performance under this section (…)

“Controlling authority” is defined to mean the local authority in its role as “licensing authority”, following the meaning given to that phrase by the Licensing Act 2003.1 The 1952 Act further prescribes that no act of hypnotism of the kind covered by the Act shall be performed on anyone under the age of 18 (s3). Scientific or medical users are outside the scope of the Act (s5):

Nothing in this Act shall prevent the exhibition, demonstration or performance of hypnotism (otherwise than at or in connection with an entertainment) for scientific or research purposes or for the treatment of mental or physical disease.

It is open for the licensing authority to impose such conditions as it may see fit on any hypnotism license. The licensing authority must decide, in each case, whether an act of hypnotism requires licensing under the 1952 Act. As you appreciate, the House of Commons Library cannot provide an interpretation of the law; that is a matter for the courts.

Displays of public hypnotism are not “regulated entertainment” for the purposes of the Licensing Act 2003. However, in the absence of case law2 on street hypnotism, it maybe helpful to compare the treatment of entertainment under the 2003 Act. The 1952 Act is concerned with “entertainment to which the public are admitted (…) at any place”. The status of “street hypnotists” calls to mind the debates about “busking” which arise from the Licensing Act 2003. Under the 2003 Act, regulated entertainment is licensable when it takes place on “premises”. “Premises” are defined to include “any place”3, and this is generally understood to include places outdoors. Thus commercial open air music concerts fall to be licensed. It is less clear whether busking is licensable. A legal textbook devotes several paragraphs to this problem and concludes that it is “unlikely” that busking requires authorisation under a premises license or temporary event notice.4

The book cites a Court of Appeal ruling from 1996 which held that a busker who habitually played his guitar in one spot in Leicester Square was not providing music at a “place” and therefore did not require a license.5 The court adopted a “purposive” approach in respect of the word “place” and concluded that the entertainment licensing regime is not designed to deal with situations where what is going on is in a street to which every music-maker or other member of the public has access.

This is consistent with advice from the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, which invokes the “incidental music” exemption under the 2003 Act:

Is busking licensable?

In most circumstances busking, in the sense that the word is normally used, will not be licensable.

Busking is usually “incidental” to other activities – such as shopping – or the premises where the music is played will not have been provided for busking to take place. There may however be instances that fall outside this, and other laws and by-laws may apply. Licensing authorities will be able to tell individual performers whether or not they need permission to perform in any given circumstances.6

When parliament debated stage hypnotism in 1994 in the wake of several cases of mental harm caused to subjects, the then Minister expressed concern that the “research” exemption was open to misuse:

Michael Forsyth: My hon. Friend the member of Taunton (Mr Nicholson) has been in touch with me about an unauthorised display of hypnotism in a public house in his constituency. It seems that the hypnotist concerned claimed that the performance was being conducted for research, and argued the he needed no licence or other authorisation because of the exemption that I mentioned earlier.

It is not for me to interpret the law in that or any other particular case, but it seems questionable whether a performance of hypnotism in a public house can genuinely be described for research. However, the local licensing authority, on which responsibility for enforcing the requirements of the Hypnotism Act 1952 rests, did not feel able to initiate a prosecution.

Further concerns over enforcement were raised by an article published in October in Stage and Television Today, which the hon. Gentleman drew to my attention. It suggests that the other stage hypnotists were to conduct demonstrations for research purposes, so avoiding the licensing requirements of the Hypnotism Act. Clearly if it were possible to circumvent the controls of the Act on entertainments involving hypnotism simply by labelling the performance “research”, the purpose of the Act would be undermined. In fact, the issues arising out of stage hypnotism and the legislation controlling it have never been clear-cut.7

The Home Office issued guidance to licensing authorities in 1953, at about the time when the Act came into force. That guidance was revised in 1989, and issued as a Home Office circular to local authorities.8 In 1994 the Government announced a review of the workings of the Hypnotism Act 1952 by a panel of experts.9 The review examined evidence of possible harm to people taking part in entertainment involving hypnotism and considered the appropriateness of the present regime of control. The results were set out in a new Home Office circular.10 The 1996 circular includes enhanced “model conditions” that local authorities might consider attaching to an authorisation but makes no mention of street entertainers or the research exemption. ”

________________________
1 Licensing Act 2003 s3
2 The only case law I have been able to find on hypnotism concerns allegations that the subject suffered mental harm as a result of a stage act.
3 Licensing Act 2003 s193
4 Colin Manchester et al, Alcohol and entertainment licensing law, 2nd edn, 2008, pp 162-163
5 R v Bow Street Magistrates’ Court, ex p McDonald [1996] 15 LS Gaz R 30
6 http://www.culture.gov.uk/what_we_do/alcohol_and_entertainment/4060.aspx#27
7 HC Deb 14th December 1994 cc749-750
8 Home Office Circular 42/1989
9 “Ministers to review hypnotic stage acts”, Independent, 14th December 1994
10 Home Office Circular 39/1996, Stage hypnotism: review of the Hypnotism Act 1952

===========================================================

Why Comfort zones are your GPS.

If my body were a car I guess I’d be driving the equivalent of a Yugo or at best a 1990 Skoda. And were that the case I’d be driving one that has been ‘messed around with’ by a surgeon mechanic who thought that adding a body kit would improve the performance and by an owner who thought that hi-octaine additives wouldn’t blow the odd gasket.

But although the mechanics have been sorely abused the thing that sits in the driving seat, makes the thing go, points it and starts it and presses the buttons works very well thanks.

I’ve got a good idea of where I’m going and providing the car I’m driving is regularly serviced, I should be able to get there. However I’m not going to get there if I don’t get some directions.

I know I could buy an AtoZ , get a road map, stop and ask directions and even hire a guide. And we should do all of those things but, unlike the cars of years ago, the vehicle you and I drive through life came fitted with a full blown computerised guidance system. If you like an internal GPS that makes sure that even if we told to turn right at the next junction when we should be turning left we ‘Know’ we are heading in the wrong direction.

I am of course talking about comfort zones but the metaphor of cars and such spring readily to mind as I am writing this sitting in the showroom of my local dealership while my actual 4×4 gets it’s first ever MOT which of course means three years old and time for a change.

Your intuition, your gut feelings, your instincts. These are what throw you signals so you can tell when you are going too fast, need an oil change or if your break pads are worn. They are there for a reason and that is to tell you what direction you should point your vehicle and your life at.

I know, the gurus tell us that the only way to grow is to step outside our comfort zone and challenge ourselves. Except the people telling us that are standing firmly in their own comfort zones and have very often not ‘grown’ for years.

All successful people are the ones who found their talent, the thing that makes them feel strong and alive. And once they find that they tend to stay firmly where they are. And that is natural.

You can plant an Oak in salt water and it will live for a while, a Mangrove would do likewise in Hyde Park but neither of them are in their designated environment, so neither of them will ‘feel’ comfortable and eventually they will do the opposite of growing.

I know I’m going to be inundated with an email from some bloke who has spent his whole life expanding his comfort zones and ‘growing’. There’s always one. But if we really take a good look I’ll bet a skateboard to a Range Rover that the bloke has never reached the destination he set himself and has spent years reversing out of dead end back streets and being hauled out of quarries.

Your internal GPS system tells you when there is a exit ahead. It tells you when to turn around at the first opportunity. And it really will tell you when you’ve reached your destination.

That’s it job. To tell you when you are doing the thing you should be doing. When you have discovered your talent. When you are Comfortable.

I’ll talk more about talent next week and hopefully we’ll be back on track and you’ll get the next WWW on a Wednesday. Yes I know it’s Friday. But I guess I forgot to turn my GPS system on and missed the Wednesday turning.

===========================================================

And finally I put this up on facebook, but in case you missed it.

“Patient: ‘Doctor. It hurts when I press here, here and here.’ Doctor: ‘Of course it does. You’ve broken your finger.’ ” Tommy Cooper.

Don’t miss the obvious looking at the complex.