Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
New government controls on betting shops announced
The government has just announced new controls on betting shops and fixed odds terminals. Their announcement says 'Bookies who want to open new shops will have to submit a planning application and local councils will be able to refuse applications and stop new betting shops opening in their area'. So, that's good news and not before time.
They also say:
'We want there to be a gambling sector that is vibrant and responsible. The Government wants to make sure the industry is putting player protection and social responsibility at the heart of their businesses'.
The foreword to the full document says:
'The measures set out in this document are intended to help customers stay in control. In line with the Government’s Principles of Regulation, any new statutory regulations will be subject to an Impact Assessment which will assess the net cost to business and will be subject to independent scrutiny by the Regulatory Policy Committee. I expect changes to take effect from October 2014.
Helen Grant ( a government minister).
The link to the Department of Communities and Local Government announcement is here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/gambling-protections-and-control...
Zena Brabazon
Cllr, St. Ann's Ward
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by james walsh on
-
I hope i don't sound naive but these 'new' controls seem in a nutshell to simply allow the punter to set their own spending limit before depositing money into the machine. A bit like an alcoholic deciding how much alcohol they will drink before they start drinking ?
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
Zena thanks for posting this. I hope it has some effect but I fear it won't. I cannot see how that, without change in the primary legislation ("aim to permit" and removal of the demand test) this measure is likely to slow the spread of betting shops, with their regulation four FOBT's per premises. The test of its effectiveness may come with the first Appeal by an applicant, in Court, against a refusal.
Disclosure:
am a prospective councillor candidate
Highgate Ward | Liberal Democrat Party
-
Permalink Reply by Zena Brabazon on
-
You are probably right Clive and it is too little too late as so many high streets in poor areas are now full of betting shops.
But if new regulations are being implemented then we need to know what they are and what powers local authorities will have. Whoever is on the council will need to be fully briefed, understand their powers and know exactly what they can do.
Zena Brabazon
Cllr, St. Ann's ward (till May 22)
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
If it's about refusal of planning permission Clive I would imagine appeals will be heard by the Planning Inspectorate. Hope they're planning to take on more staff.
-
-
Michael, I can see a collision coming between two sets of legislation and it may take time and court cases to determine whether planning law trumps the last Government's powerful Gambling Act, or vice versa.
FPR, any recent increase comes after bigger falls after the tax rises were announced in the Budget, that would hit those companies profitability. The market doesn't always digest immediately, new price-sensitive information. I can only hope that a longer term plan is to gradually reduce the profits from FOBTs, so that if/when they are banned it wouldn't be such a blow to the 'industry'.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
It's not a planning issue, it looks like a planning issue. It's about the technology used in the FOBTs. So legislation exists to keep machines like this away from high streets where they know they will cause problems. The wording was something to the effect of "you're not allowed to bet on something happening in the shop, only a view of something happening remotely, like on a TV". So the FOBTs get around this by running the "game" on a server somewhere and the punter merely has a view on their FOBT client. Nobody has challenged this legally as far as I know but I think it definitely breaks the spirit of the previous legislation.
Things you need to fleece these poor men of their earnings:
- Programmers to write the software
- Telecoms to process the communications with the server
- Debit card processing technology
The banks should treat debit card transactions in betting shops as part of your daily cash limit. They have no interest in doing this as when the punters go over their overdraft they can sting them for bank charges amounting to hundreds of pounds a year.
The solution is not in planning law.
-
-
John I agree with your analysis.
FOBTs are far removed from putting few pounds on a horse. They surely represent close to the ultimate, cynical automation, mechanisation, distillation and distribution of gambling.
You might add to your list (4) psychologists, including the world's only Professor of Gambling (who appeared as a witness for a betting shop Appeal in the former Haringey Magistrates Court); (5) lawyers who crafted the legislation; and (6) a compliant (New Labour) Government who paved the way, despite advice and warnings from many, including from within the Labour Party.
I fear that any new planning category, though possibly desirable in the longer run, will only generate new work for gambling industry barristers and – without change in the Gambling Act 2005 – they will prevail.
Disclosure:
am a prospective councillor candidate
Highgate Ward | Liberal Democrat Party
-
-
I personally do not blame the Labour Party for this. No matter who was in power they would have come up against the juggernaut that is the gambling lobby. Efforts were made to curb the effects of these machines, which had problems we already knew about, by limiting them to four per shop. The unforeseen effect of this was the apparent planning problem we see today. What they should have done was make a distinction between a real event and a virtual event. I don't believe it is too late to do that, we just need someone to challenge this in court.
-
-
I personally do not blame the Labour Party for this
John do you think there was any chance at all that this (the bet365 donation of £400,000+ to New Labour) might have influenced the then government, even just a little?
-
-
Fair enough but it would have influenced anyone who was in government. It just happened to be that they were in power when FOBTs first hit the scene. The letter I got today from my solicitor said that a Judicial Review will cost me £120,000 if I lose and I bet the Labour Party would like that but I wonder what I'd get for it? A meeting, two? You can't say that legislation can be bought for £400,000.
-
Permalink Reply by Alison P on
-
Wow, I didn't know that John - very interesting (the point about FOBTs running remotely, and so getting round the fact that you can't bet on something going on in the actual betting shop).
-
-
A victory against the betting shops! on Wednesday, the Haringey Licensing Committee threw out an application from Paddy Power for a betting shop in what was the Lordship pub on Lordship lane! it took a hard fought campaign from local people, but it showed it can be done. About 20 people came to the hearing, of which around a dozen spoke. Paddy Power turned up with various barristers, an ex policeman and other hangers-on. Hopefully this will set a precedent for future licensing applications.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
