This sub-thread was moved from a
nother discussion.
By Clive Carter 7 hours ago
I am sure those in the Licensing Authority have a stressful job and sometimes this expresses itself in terse, brusque notes to potential Objectors. I suspect Objectors are seen by Haringey as naive, ignorant fools, because Haringey understands the law well and know the futility of Objection under current legislation. I am told that Haringey threatened one persistent campaigner with an injunction.
While the present law obtains, there will either be continuous aggravation or resentment.
Betting operators will just laugh at posts on Facebook: and laugh all the way to the bank. The Act that enabled saturation betting shops needs to be reversed in the same way it came into being: by the lobbying of politicians.
To give an example of how the betting lobby works, in submissions to the DCMS prior to the "reform" of the Gambling Act, one of the contributors was listed as just "Lexington". (Was this the PR firm Lexington Communications who had represented casino interests in the past? The same PR firm retained by Haringey Council when they tried to sell Alexandra Palace to Firoka, with a Lease that specifically allowed a casino?)
The public did not clamour for the Gambling Act: let us not pretend that politicians are innocent in all this. It is time that they took responsibility for the laws they have visited upon the community.
Reply by Alan Stanton 7 hours ago
● "I suspect Objectors are seen by Haringey as naive, ignorant fools, because Haringey understands the law well and know the futility of Objection under current legislation."
Please post evidence of this.
● "I am told that Haringey threatened one persistent campaigner with an injunction."
Please post evidence.
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor. And not a member of a Licensing Panel)
Reply by Clive Carter 6 hours ago
Alan I am not going to embarrass the particular individuals involved: but the rude emails to a potential objector (not me), copies of which I have seen, were recent. The Licensing Officer is working under a lot of pressure as I acknowledged, but the aggravation has increased as a result of the Gambling Act.
I am prepared to believe that you had no hand in the promotion of this Act.
But rather than doubting or questioning examples of the aggravation it has caused, it might be more constructive to turn your mind to ways of amending the legislation, effectively.
Reply by Alan Stanton 6 hours ago
As you know, Clive, I sometimes praise what the Council does. But I've never held back on justified and, if necessary, public criticism of council departments or teams; of misguided policies; and of individual councillors.
I also provide examples and evidence to support my criticisms.
Of course, I sometimes get things wrong - occasionally, badly wrong. And then I withdraw my criticisms and offer an apology.
As a local councillor, residents often tell me about things the Council got wrong or did badly. I neither doubt nor dismiss what they say. But I do want to see the evidence. I ask questions: Who? What? Where? When?
You've made serious allegations on a public website. I am neither doubting nor dismissing what you wrote. But apparently, you are not prepared to be questioned, nor to produce any evidence.
Reply by Clive Carter 5 hours ago
Alan I will email you privately and you can judge for yourself. But all I'm pointing out is that the Gambling Act is causing more stress in the Licensing department as well as dissent in the community. I have no wish to cause trouble to council employees trying their best to do their job, work to New Labour's Gambling Act under stressful conditions.
Some residents out there, who would wish to object to yet more Premises Applications, are unfamiliar with the Act and harbour the illusion that Objectors will get a fair Hearing rather than be treated to a charade.
But I hardly think further evidence of this aggravation is needed and I think you anyway know this. As a councillor in a Ward that is affected by this, what do you think is the best way forward? Do you think politicians have a responsibility to correct bad legislation? If so, what do you propose?