During the Committee stage that the Bill has just passed, it has luckily been hassled into considerable revision. Originally the Bill was to receive Government time in the House of Commons - it is a Private Member's Bill; unofficially, Heath will now not allow this extra time. So even if the Bill is to be passed it won't be for a while.

The history of the Bill is interesting. Jerry Wiggin the perpetrator of this attempt to suppress us in the name of law and order, says that the Bill is aimed at controlling pop festivals. But as the NCCL said, no mention is made anywhere of pop festivals. Mark Woodnutt MP, one of the Bill's sponsors, explained his "difficulty" in drafting a bill relating to health and safety at pop festivals, and said such organisations as the NCCL should propose amendments to limit its scope.

Well, they did and the happy result is that lots of people have got cold feet and backed out of supporting the Bill. It has become bad politics now that it is obvious that what was on the surface a public health measure was in fact law and order.

The dangers of the original drafting are many. It covered any assembly, and the NCCL was concerned that this would affect charity meetings, trade union rallies, or political demonstrations. Also that it would give too much power to councils and officials who should not have it. Now at the 3rd meeting of the committee stage - after the Dept of the Environment presented their report saying that the Bill was "bad law" and "not the way to solve the problems of the environment" - a new clause has been added exempting events if they are: exclusively religious or political; exclusively advancing the views of those concerned in an industrial dispute - with 3 provisos: that they do not last longer than 24 hrs; that they are not held with a view to profit for the promoters or others; and if they will not be frustrated by a 4 months' wait.

The dangers foreseen by the NCCL have thus obviously been reduced. Strikers will no longer fall under the provisions of the Bill in many circumstances: though they will if they wish to collect strike funds. Similarly events such as the Aldermaston March - lasting more than 24 hrs - would be affected. The Bill impinges on our basic right of assembly.

The point still holds; why not name and define pop festivals? The Bill is a piece of undercover work against our political and cultural freedom. For we should not underestimate the huge cultural importance of pop festivals, or the remaining political power of this piece of "health legislation". It does not say much for the workings of our parliament that it takes such organisations as the NCCL to protect us against our elected representatives.

At this sensitive cross-over point between the legal and the political, we must be most wary of our freedom being taken away from us under cover of such subterfuge.

Maurice