One of the biggest problems associated with modern bureaucracies is their resistance to change, their very structure designed to delay modernization in the interest of careful consideration. Not unlike all the ‘popular’ kids from high school who ended up married and pregnant in their early twenties, provided they even made it that long; government ministries such as the Manitoba Liquor Commission seem to be stuck in a time warp, only instead of involving melodrama and wasted potential, the problem centers around the definition of ‘live entertainment’. Even though the last decade has seen both electronic music and the DJs and producers behind it become increasingly accepted and incorporated by the mainstream music industry, organizations such as the MLCC and even the CRTC still operate with dated regulations that exclude DJs from being considered as live entertainment or Canadian content.
What the hell does the MLCC have to do with determining the meaning of ‘live entertainment’ and why is it relevant? For starters, in order to serve alcohol at a venue, a liquor license is required, of which there are several types. In this case the issue is restricted to a specific kind, namely a Cabaret License; venues like the Academy, Pyramid, and Pure all fall under this category. As per the Liquor Control Act, “A cabaret licensee shall provide live entertainment in accordance with the regulations during each day on which the cabaret is open.” The act the goes on in defining said entertainment as “... a live professional performance...for which at least one performer is remunerated by the licensee...that takes place on a stage visible to all patrons and which constitutes the main focus of the cabaret; and...that is designed to draw the attention of all patrons; but does not include a disc jockey or master of ceremonies.”
How does this affect venue owners and promoters? In order to circumvent this seemingly archaic and outdated rule, most cabaret licensees hire female go-go dancers to get up on stage by the DJ. As even a rookie party goer can observe, this ends up sending a message to other, less coordinated and more inebriated girls that joining them on stage is a good idea. Lots of drunk girls on stage tend to cause skipped records (vinyl that is), pulled plugs and other mishaps associated with the mixing of clumsy, oblivious people and high tech equipment in close proximity, as many a DJ has bitched about.
According to the MLCC’s internal communications coordinator, Susan Harrison, “The original intent of the regulation was to ensure that cabarets introduced a satisfactorily high standard of performance such as a live band; a DJ playing recorded music simply does not meet the requirement. That being said, we do recognize that this is an emerging entertainment area and that there are certainly DJ’s out there who are of a high calibre. If a cabaret operator wants to include a DJ as a performance, they have the option to approach the Licensing Board for approval. The Licensing Board has recently approved DJ’s who are remixing music in a performance setting in the past, but we have not had enough of these requests to warrant exploring a regulation change.”
Why hasn’t something been done about this? Various people have at one time or another researched and attempted to change the rules to reflect the times. One such person is local DJ cum lawyer, Dan Gilson, who says that the real problem in changing the rules lies in properly distinguishing the talent and artistry from the cliche’d and mediocre. “It’s a tough thing to create language in a document to decide that question.” To further complicate things, the prevalence of digital technology used by DJs has made it “...harder to make the case that they are performers if all they are doing is opening a laptop and putting on traktor.” However, if fun-fur clad go-go dancers manage to qualify, the bar of standards is arguably low enough to include even the most microwaved DJ hacks, (here’s looking at you, Sam Ronson and Steve Aoki).
It should be noted that the mandatory show and subsequent DJ exemption does not apply to other types of liquor licenses. In fact, the cabaret license is the only one that requires live entertainment at all. For example, the various Canada Inns bars, invariably similar in their common mediocrity, fall into a different category only because the are attached to hotels and thus avoid the issue entirely. Though it is rumored that one or more members of the Liquor Commission is connected to said chain and or the Manitoba Hotel Association, no evidence confirming those claims was found in the researching of this article. Ultimately, the bulk of the blame lies in the nature of bureaucracy itself and its inherent resistance to change, regardless of how clearly warranted it might be.
Read the whole act at:
http://web2.gov.mb.ca/laws/statutes/ccsm/l160e.php:
Miles McEnery
miles.mcenery@gmail.com
