Next year a piece of legislation aimed at controlling lap dancing clubs will affect every LGBT venue offering so-called “sexual entertainment”. There’s a very real chance that Amateur Strip Night at BJ’s White Swan will come to an end. David McGillivray investigates why some local councils seem determined to turn the clock back more than 40 years…

Ignorance of the law is no excuse, they say. But you can be forgiven if you know nothing about Section 27 of the Policing and Crime Act 2009. On the face of it, the legislation hardly concerns us at all.

Announced by Labour Home Secretary Jacqui Smith in 2008, it was intended to give local people greater say in the number and location of lap dancing clubs in their area. How many gay men should get involved in a public consultation on this issue? None? Wrong.

Suddenly we all ought to get involved. Because of our cherished sexual equality laws, controls on clubs offering sex fun for straight men must also affect clubs offering sex fun for gay men. Unfortunately the implementation of this new legislation is looking distinctly moralistic. Not to mention avaricious.

Last year Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Crime Reduction Alan Campbell effectively washed his hands of the previous administration’s policy when he gave local authorities (in England and Wales) the power to regulate “sexual entertainment venues”. This has resulted in Section 27 being interpreted as the local authority sees fit.

There’s now one set of rules for residents of SW8, quite a different set if you live in E14. A common factor, however, appears to be opportunism. At present all venues presenting “sexual entertainment” (that phrase is still in quotes because there’s difference of opinion as to what it implies) must have a licence. But it’s free.

From next year it won’t be. It’s hard to see how charging an existing venue up to £14,000 a year for the privilege of presenting previously acceptable entertainment benefits local people. It’s easier to see how it benefits the local authority.

What might be called a winner in this post code lottery is Vauxhall, under the jurisdiction of Lambeth Council. Mark Oakley, boss of The Eagle and a prominent gay businessman, calls Lambeth “one of the most progressive, forward-thinking and socially aware councils in London.” Mark’s full of praise for the way that Lambeth works with him to keep The Eagle ticking over.

It’s probably not worth mentioning that it’s in Lambeth’s interests to remain gay-friendly. Every weekend up to 20,000 people visit Vauxhall and boost Lambeth’s economy by around £1 million. Nevertheless the Council still intends to sting The Eagle for a sex tax.

The figure hasn’t been confirmed yet. But Mark reckons it may be between £3-7,000. He’ll have to pay it to ensure the future of Ashley Ryder’s Strip Academy, one of his bar’s most popular nights, which pulls 200 punters every Tuesday.

Mark was appalled to hear of the far more complex problems facing Central Station. He offered the services of Ashley who’ll “strip in front of the Town Hall” to raise awareness of Section 27. (Ashley may not be aware of this commitment).

The case of Central Station is particularly strange. The bar is Islington’s oldest and (following the recent closure of the Edward VI and The Green) one of its only gay bars. It’s always had close links with gay activists and outsiders. Various groups meet in the Underground Club and, despite what you may think, not all of them get jiggy.

Boss Duncan Irvine talks in terms of community work and he’s not joking. He’s particularly proud of the new T-girl club, Sweet Wednesday, one of very few to cater for cross-dressers and their admirers. “The girls come up from downstairs, sit in the bar here with the other customers and feel welcome”, Duncan tells me.

“There’s hardly anywhere in London where they can do this. Otherwise they have to stay at home.” Duncan feels he shouldn’t have been slapped with a £14,000 sex tax on the strength of an online public consultation to which only 111 of the borough’s 180,000 residents contributed.“If I get 111 signatures on a petition to make the Council resign, is that enough?” he points out.

Duncan’s already had a “good discussion” with Islington, which has now agreed to allow him to pay the licence fee quarterly rather than in a lump sum. But Duncan still isn’t happy with the total amount and so the battle continues. Home Office guidance notes state that the licence fee should be “reasonable”.

“These bars will be penalised in many cases for showing nothing worse than striptease”

Duncan wants Islington to reveal how it arrived at such a huge figure. But at the moment it won’t. More to the point is whether Central Station even qualifies as a “sexual entertainment venue”. The guidance notes define this as one that offers “lap dancing, pole dancing, table dancing, strip shows, peep shows, live sex shows.

” There’s none of the above at Central Station. Furthermore “the premises will not be considered a sexual entertainment venue” if there is “a spontaneous display of nudity or a lap dance by a customer or guest.” Get out of that, Islington!

When it comes to BJ’s White Swan, we’re dealing with a matter of the utmost urgency. Another long-established gay bar (the oldest in the East End), the White Swan has the misfortune to be in Tower Hamlets, whose Mayor is the controversial Lutfur Rahman. Let’s not drag up once again unproven allegations that Rahman has connections with an Islamic extremist group.

All that’s relevant in this context is that he stood up at this year’s East London Pride and declared, “I want you to be in no doubt I will fight to ensure there is respect for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender culture and rights in the same way I will for all communities.”

Rahman has a funny way of showing this. He is using a consultation on Section 27 as an excuse to close down all “sex establishments” in Tower Hamlets because “they have an adverse impact on neighbourhoods.” He includes BJ’s White Swan among these sex establishments on the strength of its Amateur Strip Night, which has been running for more than a quarter of a century without complaint.

It’s unlikely in the extreme that Rahman has seen Amateur Strip Night, which isn’t a live sex show (one critic called it “post-ironic comedy”) and could be exempted as a party with spontaneous displays of nudity.

Rahman’s anti-sex crusade also appears to be moralistic. But this isn’t tolerated by Home Office guidelines either. Paragraph 3.23 clearly states that “objections should not be based on moral grounds/values.”

Despite this, White Swan DJ Daryl Stafford, who’s launched a petition to save Amateur Strip Night, is pessimistic. His only hope of a reprieve is when he presents his petition at a Tower Hamlets Council meeting on 29th November. He’s been to these meetings before and they’re daunting.

“You say your bit”, he reveals, “and then you have two minutes to reply to about twenty questions fired at you from all over the place.” Daryl adds that, “It feels like it’s already been decided.” The White Swan may have to scrap its most famous night and this could be disastrous at a time when so many bars are failing to keep pace with the recession.

The first question we should be asking is whether it’s really necessary to clobber a handful of gay bars, some of them struggling to stay afloat, with legislation intended to control men exploiting women. These bars will be penalised in many cases for showing nothing worse than striptease.

It was shocking in the 1950s. But since then? There have been male strippers in London since 1970. Will they now have to go back to wearing G-strings and posing pouches? How will this improve life in London? Now we know the implications of Section 27, we should also know what to do.

• If you want to sign the petition supporting Amateur Strip Night at BJ’s White Swan visit http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/exempt-bjs-white-swan-from-sex-extablishment-review.html

Advertisement