Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
More Bad News on Green Lanes Betting Shops
The Licensing Committee has granted permission for a premises licence for Betfred (next to the Post Office). One slender hope remains in the form of a possible refusal from the Planning Inspectorate for planning permission, whose decision is still awaited, but with the licence now granted, the scales are tipped further against us.
What all this means, which of course we already knew, is that it is impossible to prevent an unlimited number of betting shops opening in our community.
What all this means, which of course we already knew, is that it is impossible to prevent an unlimited number of betting shops opening in our community.
Tags for Forum Posts: 513 Green Lanes, betting shops, gambling, green lanes
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Ruth on
-
Yes, its gone too far now and needs a change in legislation. Its going on all over the country. There has to be a shift in policy to stop all our high streets becoming betting centres with gangs of men hanging around them. Real shops. Real jobs. This is what we need.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
Agree Ruth. It does need a change in the leglislaton: but not fiddling with some Act unrelated to the Act which is the source of the problem. I hope that Office of David Lammy MP is reading the excellent link put up by Hugh to the Guardian article (above).
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
So, digging around a bit more, I've caught up with progress on the most promising channel for relief.
Under the new Sustainable Communities Act, councils can apply for new powers. Last summer Hackney Council made an application to give councils more powers to control what happens on local high streets.
A post on the Local Government Association's website last week seems to be telling us that this proposal has been short-listed and is to be submitted as a recommendation to the Government.
Looking through the publication of all the proposals to be submitted, I thought there seems to be a few interesting things in there. So I've added another post on it.
And by way of a postscript, Clive Carter has just alerted me to a letter from the indefatigable Mario Petrou which was published in the Journal this week.
-
Permalink Reply by PeterPiper on
-
You have of course alerted us to this in the past Hugh, back in November. 3rd post on the discussion. You highlighted efforts by the Green Party to use the Sustainable Communities Act to allow residents & councils to have greater control over their streets and neigbourhoods. It's good to hear that the Local Government Association still have it shortlisted as a priority for pressing for government action.
It is disappointing to realise that progress appears to be less than snail pace though. I remember Councillor Canver being asked regarding Haringey Council's opinion on this approach, but she appeared to dismiss it as a non-starter.
I've often asked myself why the lack of enthusiasm from LBH, could this in any way be linked with Haringey Council's new Gambling Policy for 2010-2013, which was accepted, passed and adopted at full council shortly before Christmas, last December by the majority party (Labour).
Under the heading for Casinos, the policy states:
THERE IS NO RESOLUTION TO PROHIBIT CASINOS IN THE BOROUGH AT PRESENT. THE LICENSING AUTHORITY IS AWARE IT HAS THE POWER TO DO SO UNDER SECTION 166 OF THE GAMBLING ACT 2005
You will probably not be surprised to hear that Hackney council is enlightened enough to have a NO CASINO POLICY! - Attachments:
-
-
What I seemed to believe on my last post was that each borough needed to make an application under the SC Act. My current understanding is that, if accepted, Hackney's application will give rise to powers that will be available for all councils.
-
-
Peter, thanks for highlighting Haringey's approach to Casinos, in contrast to other Boroughs. This shifty council claims that there is no need to put and pass a 'No Casino' resolution, because they say, there is little chance of a casino (in the short term) and there is a limited number of casino licences (for the time being). The apparent practical-expediency approach may cover more suspect motives. There are two points to be made here:
First it is hard to overlook that senior Counclllor H. Lister has long lobbied for a casino in the Borough which would go into our Charitable Trust, Alexandra Palace. Cllr. Lister chaired a meeting of the Full Licencing Committee that approved a permanent gambling Premises Licence in part of Alexandra Palace. This Licence is currently limited to the annual Darts Championship, but the precedent has been set. No one else on that Committee said a word and Cllr. Lister ran roughshod over the 6 (six) approved Objectors.
He disregarded the points of a experienced lawyer amongst the Objectors and refused to Minute a key point being made – such was the determination to approve the council's own gambling Application: Alexandra Palace Trading Ltd. is 100% controlled by the council (just another of the continuous conflicts-of-interest up on the hill).
Second, the council ignore any need to set the tone (as other Boroughs have) and take some kind of a stand against the spread of gambling. It is suspicious that they see no need to do this, in spite of the unlikeliood of a casino licence in the short term. To coin a phrase, the council is hedging its bets. I had thought that the Labour Party had more moral fibre than this. It shows how far they have come, or gone. It's a managerial approach, devoid of morality.
Haringey speaks with a forked tongue on gambling.
-
-
Forked tongues indeed, as with many issues around communities. They need to say no to a casino but also no to the proliferation of betting shops which create an atmosphere of gambling not only in one dedicated place but all over the place. They need to be proportionate to other types of shops on the high street. But seems the high streets are all doomed with the spread of large retail centres, out of town shopping centres. Personally, I hate such places and dont drive anyway. The high streets are left to go to hell on a handcart.
-
-
Worth looking at the publication I link to in my other post from last night Ruth.
-
-
thanks Hugh for this and to everyone else who found related links and discussions. Sustainable communities... now that is a good idea! Seems like the government has been busy wrecking communities. Let's hope the general election sees these issues becoming more of a priority.
No one will get my vote (please take note mr Lammy!) if they dont offer real help for communities who want and need the 'old' things on the high streets like post offices (so many have been shut) banks, butchers, bakers and candlestick makers etc...
-
-
Sorry to be a bearer of bad tidings, but I learnt today that the Planning Inspectorate allowed the appeal regarding 513 Green Lanes, where Betfred have obtained a bookies license.
It seems to have taken along time for us to be notified, and as yet I, as one of many objectors, have not received an official notification, but as a result of hearsay, checked the PI website, only to be horrified that the decision was taken on February 24, 2010, 2 & half weeks ago; coincidently, the same day that David Lammy's article appeared in the Evening Standard. Am I paraonoid, or has a curtain of silence descended - surely LBH were notified at least.
(The decision in full is available here, where it can be downloaded as a 'read only' document. I can't attach it unfortunately. The procedure is a bit longwinded I'm afraid, but click on the "decision" highlighted in blue, and follow the prompts. Eventually you will be presented with a .pdf file that can be downloaded.)
-
-
There seems to be a lack of transparency about the ways things were handled if the decision was several weeks ago and no-one was notified. This is terrible. LBH surely must have been notified! OK, so we can now have a bigger choice of where to lose our money on a flutter but less choice about where we do anything else. I liked it when the Nationwide was there, so handy. When I go to the Wood green branch, I am always in there for ages due to queues.
very depressing all round but thanks for letting us know.
-
-
Decision attached.
- Attachments:
-
-
513 Green Lanes Decision.pdf, 106 KB
-
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
