David Lammy proposed an amendment last night to the Localism Bill. This would have made it very much harder for betting shops to set up in retail shops. William Hill and Paddy Power would have had to apply for planning permission. Local residents would have had a chance to oppose clustering on the grounds that, in Lynne's own words, 'enough is enough'.
Well, last night showed that enough is sometimes not quite enough for Ms Featherstone. David's amendment rallied 221 votes. Lynne and her friends voted against. All 46 of them.
Tags for Forum Posts: betting shops
ha ha. do we know why? any lib dem councillors care to answer? or would lynne be so kind?
Whilst applauding as loudly as everyone else our MPs action on this front, when in government he was just as meek as Ms Featherstone when it came to voting according to his ministerial salary. I'd really leave that one alone a bit longer, we're not goldfish.
I see no obvious photoshopping. The legend on the paper has been burned in to make it more legible, often a useful trick but a bit overdone here. Photoshopping as a verb is usually about combining bits of different images, or moving them about - where's that been done?
This illustrates why crediting and captioning pics taken (I could say stolen) from the interwebs is so necessary. Sadly the journalists' campaign for every altered image to bear an 'altered' logo fell by the wayside. We're still fighting off the mass copyright grab of orphan works legislation which would give carte blanche to publishers to pretend they can't find the author of a work, and pay a pittance into a pool. Look it up, if you ever want to get paid for your work that may end up online.
NB In the USA and elsewhere, photojournalists are sacked if they alter their photos, and the ethic here is that anything that changes the meaning of a photo is wrong. (That excludes cropping and correcting exposure, things that could be done in the darkroom.)
So Julie, URL of the original please?
It is true that as a minister Lynne F has no option but to vote with the government...well, not quite, she can abstain but it appears she had no 'urgent' business at the time of the vote.
Interesting blog post here from the Planning wonks about this.
Next step is to pressure the department of Culture, Sport and Media for a review of the flawed 2005 Gambling act which caused this problem in the first place (yes, he voted for it, now he understands presumably why it was a bad piece of legislation).
So all is not lost, but even had he won we would not have been able to close the ones we've already got and it remains to be seen whether market forces are working in the way they are supposed to (see article linked to) i.e. so much competition meaning the closure of the less 'popular' ones. I'm not seeing much evidence of that happening, nor I think will we, while fixed odds betting terminals are permitted in them.
© 2024 Created by Hugh. Powered by
© Copyright Harringay Online Created by Hugh