Examination of Witnesses (Questions 220-233)
PETER DEAN
CBE, TOM KAVANAGH
CBE, GERALDINE MENEAUD-LISSENBURG
AND ELLIOT
GRANT
18 DECEMBER 2003
Q220 Lord Faulkner of Worcester: Do you
detect any difference between scratch card lotteries run by Camelot
and the scratch card lotteries run by the society lotteries for
the benefit of good causes?
Mr Dean: I am not sure this is
anything that I have turned my mind to.
Mr Kavanagh: Do you have a particular
problem in mind?
Q221 Lord Faulkner of Worcester: No.
Mr Dean: Scratch cards are scratch
cards.
Mr Page: Clause 206 says that at least
20% of the proceeds of any lottery promoted under the licence
must go to good causes.
Q222 Lord Faulkner of Worcester: Is it
not sensible for the regulation of those competitions to be done
by the same body, given that they are identical competitions?
Mr Dean: I will have to refer
to my earlier answer.
Q223 Chairman: My clerk tells me that
we have the clause covering what Mr Kavanagh said in section five
of schedule seven. The Minister was at pains to confirm, I thought,
that he would be looking to the Gambling Commission to enforce
the new legislation on lotteries and prize competition. I can
well understand your concern that there needs to be clarity.
Mr Dean: Good. Thank you.
Q224 Jeff Ennis: The Commission will
be given a number of wide ranging powers under the new provisions,
including the power to force entry into premises etc. Are these
powers sufficient to enable you to do your job or do you think
you ought to have further powers?
Mr Dean: I think they are sufficient
to do the job. They will enhance the ability of the regulator
over the current position in a number of ways. First of all, the
ability to fine and to suspend licence holders will be very useful.
It is worth making a distinction between the use of the powers
so far as they apply to the regulated industry and the use of
the powers so far as they apply to illegal gambling. So far as
the regulated industry is concerned, we have not been lobbying
for more powers because the regulatory industry by and large has
a tradition of compliance which we would certainly hope to build
on in the guise of the Gambling Commission. When it comes to dealing
with illegal operations, that is where the powers will be particularly
appropriate.
Q225 Jeff Ennis: You mentioned that you
have been lobbying for certain powers to be included in the Bill.
Were there any powers that you lobbied for that have not been
included in the Bill?
Mr Dean: No.
Q226 Jeff Ennis: How transparent do you
think the workings of the Gambling Commission should be?
Mr Dean: I think they will be
very open and transparent. It is fair to say that the Gaming Board
historically has not been particularly open and transparent. We
have striven to become increasingly so in recent years. We have
regular working group meetings with all the sectors of the industry
that we regulate. We attend trade functions as speakers and as
listeners. Our Gaming Board staff are always ready to give advice
and I envisage all those traditions carrying on under the new
regime. In addition to that, there will be the statutory obligation
to consult on the regulatory documents that we produce and we
see no difficulty in that. We welcome that process.
Q227 Dr Pugh: Extensive rights of appeal
are given in the Bill. What percentage of your time do you think
these appeals will take up?
Mr Dean: I have no idea, but it
is not something that troubles us particularly. Currently, there
are no rights of appeal against Gaming Board decisions. If the
decisions are right in the first place, I do not think there is
any fear from the appeal process. We have never resisted the appeal
process. It is not something that we see as a problem. My guess
is that there is always bound to be a certain testing in the early
stages, particularly in relation to fines. There could be some
testing as to what is and what is not reasonable and we will go
through that process. Fine; so be it.
Q228 Lord Mancroft: You mentioned in
a different context illegal gambling and we are now talking about
the powers. What illegal gambling in general is going on now which
you cannot deal with and what are the powers to enable you to
deal with it? In the newspaper last week, there was an illegal
scam, an offshore, faked lottery. What in the Bill would prevent
you doing anything about that?
Mr Dean: Nothing, because we cannot
control what comes from overseas. One may be able to control advertisements
in this country but not much more. On the question of what is
going on, illegal gaming machines are probably the most conspicuous
answer. There are rackets going on. They are dealt with. I would
not wish to imply that nothing is done at the moment. It is the
job of the police to do what they can. The police have other priorities.
We give whatever help we can. Every so often there are raids which
go on, machines are seized and so forth. It is in those areas
in particular that the Gambling Commission would be better placed
to take prompt action.
Q229 Lord Mancroft: Is it your ability
to take out prosecutions that is going to make the major difference?
Mr Dean: Yes.
Q230 Lord Mancroft: That is an expensive
business, is it not?
Mr Dean: Yes. It is not something
that one will do lightly.
Q231 Lord Mancroft: That takes us back
to resources.
Mr Dean: Yes.
Q232 Chairman: There has been reference
to Ofcom by Lord Brooke. I remember when I served on the Standing
Committee for the Communications Bill. We did raise the issue
with ministers about costs and fines. I do not think it was a
very satisfactory regime. It may be that you will want to look
for a different answer because your resource base will be rather
less than Ofcom's and yet there may be a greater expectation on
you having to take legal action.
Mr Kavanagh: It is a point well
taken.
Mr Dean: May we think about that?
Q233 Chairman: Of course. This final
question is not intended to be unfair or put you on the spot,
particularly after all the time you have given this morning and
the time that Mr Kavanagh has given to the Gaming Board which
I think most of us accept has been very successful. How should
the success or failure of the Gambling Commission be measured?
Mr Dean: This is very difficult.
I do not believe that it is easy to devise quantitative measures
which enable you to read off and give it a tick or not. I know
it is a constant cry of regulators who are seeking to avoid measurement
but I do not believe this to be the case. There are some things
which one can measure. For example, one can measure the time taken
to deal with applications. We do that and we report on that. They
are not insignificant but they do not get to the heart of what
the regulator should be doing. At the end of the day, the success
or failure—I hope the success—should be judged by
the reputation which should be earned by the industry and sustained
over a period of years for being both crime free and socially
responsible.
Chairman: On behalf of the Committee,
can I thank Mr Dean, Mr Kavanagh, Mr Grant and Geraldine Meneaud-Lissenburg,
the silent witness. I am sure a number of things we have asked
you about will fill your in tray for quite some time. We thank
you for a good two hour session which has been extremely helpful.
As this is the final meeting of the Committee before Christmas,
can I wish all our colleagues, witnesses, staff and spectators,
who we will no doubt see again in the New Year, a Happy Christmas.
| 
