Buskers fear end of Liverpool’s street culture
Liverpool's street performers turn out in force to protest new council regulations that they say will mean the death of the city's street culture.
Our city centre streets are set to change this week. No longer are we to be greeted with the spontaneous performances of street artists and musicians. From Monday 9 July, the street performers of Liverpool are subject to strict new regulation spearheaded by our fun-loving Councillor, Steve Munby.
The regulation requires that all street entertainers purchase a permit, take out high rate liability insurance, and book in advance a council-deemed appropriate spot in which the performer(s) can use no more than an area of 1.5 metre radius in the city centre.
Moreover, the regulation puts the everyday Policeman in a unique position: It states that “entertainers must cease their performance [if] the Officer is not satisfied that the performance is of a satisfactory quality”. Simon Cowell - watch your job mate!
According to the council’s June agenda report, regulation is needed because “businesses and partner agencies are not always clear as to who is responsible for the regulation of street entertainment”. The aim is to support the Mayor’s pledge to “transform Liverpool into one of the most business and enterprise friendly cities in the UK”, and Business Improvement District (BID) Manager for Liverpool City Council Ged Gibbons agrees that retailers and shoppers will benefit from the regulation.
The policy emerges just a few weeks after Cllr Munby reassured SevenStreets that the council were in support of Liverpool’s music culture. He stated that, “We’re aiming for Liverpool to be the city of music… My colleagues and I are highly aware, and very proud, of the enormous importance of music to Liverpool’s identity.”
31 year-old Liverpudlian Jonathan Walker (pictured performing above and below with Ged Gibbons), a full-time busker and founder of the Association of Street Artists and Performers (ASAP), argues that the new initiative “prioritises business interests above the interests of the public at large” and “unduly restricts an activity that does little harm and brings much joy”.
Jonathan, a former student of Politics at Durham University, organised a mass communal busk to celebrate and defend Liverpool’s dynamic street culture, which took place on Monday. Buskers, artists, performers and others, all came out to sing, laugh, dance, paint and play in protest against a policy that will threaten the spontaneity, fun and overall energy of street performance.
Jonathan has urged for a boycott of the new policy in advising artists not to purchase a permit, which would regulate their activities as street performers. Jonathan’s online petition, which has received the backing of change.org, has received more than 2,000 signatures of support from across Liverpool and beyond.
However, there are those who feel they have little option but to comply with the council’s demands.
For 70 year-old whistle-playing church and street performer Peter King (left), objection to the policy was not an option. Peter told SS that he felt ‘forced and scared’ into complying with the policy, fearing arrest from the police.
Peter will now have to observe the terms of the policy, which requires him to stand or be seated on a chair for the duration of his performance. His preference for sitting on the floor will no longer be permitted under the new regulations.
For Robert Davis and his beautiful owl Pippin (below, right), the policy is even more final. The council has deemed that Robert’s Barn Owl is a ‘performing animal’ and therefore will be banned from the streets. Yet the owl clearly does not perform.
Robert’s objective in bringing Pippin to Liverpool was to educate the public on the life and history of this species. However, because of the new policy, Robert states that he may be forced to sell his beloved owl and declare himself unemployed.
It is clear that the council deems street performance as a ‘nuisance’ and the report puts it in the same category as begging and trespassing. Yet, it is apparent that artists such as Jonathan, Robert and Peter certainly do not, describing themselves as contributors to Liverpool’s reputation as a city of culture.
Robert told SS, “I am no beggar - I entertain an interested public”.
Lucy Jones, manager of Tabac on Bold St, expressed her anger at the new policy, stating that the “theatrical atmosphere of Church Street makes her walk to work that little bit more exciting every day”.
At a time when our major cities are becoming harder to tell apart, street performers may be our last hope.
A recent report by the Queen of the High Street herself, Mary Portas, confirms that our high streets are declining.
Why? She says it is down to a lack of community on our streets, the absence of heart, culture and a thriving communal street life.
She can’t be talking about Liverpool, can she?
April Armstrong–Bascombe
Visit www.keepstreetslive.com for information on a future protest on Saturday 14 July from 12-3pm on Church Street or goto the Facebook page
Liverpool needs more owls.
Owls playing instruments.
Have to agree with the protestors - this policy is really quite unnecessary. I think this is all the more evident when you hear about some of the individuals who are affected.
great article!
Well said. Its impossible to think of Liverpool without immediately thinking of the music. To deliberately silence the streets of this city seems obscene.
I’ve said this elsewhere but why the emphasis from the council et al about the situation in other cities? Why not beat our own path for once rather than worrying about what the likes of Manchester do?
The arrival of Liverpool One has been positive and I do think the identity of Liverpool can thrive even with the introduction of a plethora of chain stores. Policies like this, however, seem hell-bent on pushing Liverpool to become the epitome of an identikit city.
The fella who plays the trumpet on Bold St is the best. It gives me a warm, fuzzy, nostalgic feeling inside. Ace.
This policy is an attempt to give more platforms to more buskers/street entertainers - and get away from 1 busker being able to hog key sites for hours upon hours.
It may be a bit clunky - but it’s to be reviewed after 3 months to iron the kinks, so to speak.
If this was about being anti busker - the policy would surely be No Busking. Simple. But it’s not. It’s trying to find a happy middle ground that ensures everyone who wants to play can, with some caveats to ensure others are taken into consideration.
We shall soon see how this pans out but to rubbish it before its even started is a tad hasty.
Everyone who wants to play already can play! (or could) It’s up to buskers to negotiate between themselves on pitches but at ultimately it depends who is enterprising enough to get there first. Incidentally, no busker ‘owns’ a pitch just because they play there regularly. I’ve seen turf wars too many times. If you turn up to play in your favoured place and somebody is already there, it’s just tough. There is always another spot, or another city!
MIke, this policy is an attempt to impose control on the city centre. Requiring performers to book pitches up to a week in advance for a two hour slot, get £5 million worth of public liability insurance, only play in pre-approved pitches, threat of prosecution for trespass. It takes a leap of the imagination to call this a pro-busker policy. Liverpool CIty Council have badly mishandled this, and they know it.