Memorandum from Business in Sport and
Leisure Limited (DGB 37)
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Business in Sport and Leisure welcomes
the opportunity to give written evidence to the Joint Scrutiny
Committee for the Gambling Bill.
1.2 Business In Sport and Leisure (BISL)
is an umbrella organisation that represents over 100 private sector
companies in the sport and leisure industry. Its members include
most of the major operators of commercial sport and leisure in
the UK and many consultants who specialise in this field. Members
of BISL represent a wide range of interests in the sector and
include operators of casinos, bingo, betting, pools, greyhound
and horse racing, snooker and 10 pin bowling centres, pubs and
the suppliers of gaming machines. In fact as far as we are aware
BISL is the only umbrella body representing all major sectors
of the Gambling Industry.
2. RESPONSE
2.1 As an umbrella organisation, Business
In Sport and Leisure welcomes a replacement for the Gaming Act
1968, recognising that existing legislation has been in place
now for more than 40 years and that subsequently gambling has
now become part of mainstream leisure. We believe that the current
Act is unworkable as technology moves forward so quickly and there
is a real need for new and better regulation and legislation.
2.2 Business In Sport and Leisure has recently
published research commissioned from Ernst & Young: "A
Winning Hand: The Modernisation of UK Gambling" which aimed
to:
— Assess the current size of the UK
gambling market.
— Review and assess the potential implications
of changes proposed in the Gambling Bill.
— Gauge public understanding of and
reaction to the proposed changes to the gambling legislation.
There is clear support amongst the general public,
with 80 per cent in favour of the proposed changes, so long as
the industry is controlled and seen to be controlled. The public
believe that people have to and should learn to fend for themselves
and be responsible for their own actions.
2.3 The economic information shows that:
94,000 people are now employed in the gaming industry.
Gross stakes have risen from £42 billion in 1998 to £63
billion in 2003. Gross profit for 2003 will stand at £7.9
billion. The Pion report looks further at jobs, investment, tourism
and tax gains under the new legislation.
2.4 Copies of the BISL research will be
sent to all members of the Committee and will be referred to in
this response.
2.5 At the highest level, BISL welcomes
a replacement for the Gaming Act 1968, but we remain concerned
about some of the detail in the Bill and some of the policies
behind them as follows:
3. GAMBLING AND
REGENERATION
3.1 BISL supports Resort Casinos as a catalyst
for economic regeneration. The UK's seaside resorts are facing
heavy and increasing pressure from a wide range of attractions
at home and abroad. Investment by casinos in resorts can provide
investment, employment and increased visitors which benefit the
resort as a whole.
4. THE GAMBLING
COMMISSION
4.1 Business In Sport and Leisure responded
to the review of the Lottery Licence and Regulation through a
consultation paper issues by DCMS. In our response, we supported
the policy that the National Lottery should be protected from
commercial gambling. While the National Lottery Commission is
responsible for vetting and approving the games offered by Camelot
before they can be introduced, the Gambling Commission will have
no responsibility for the commercial outcome of the gambling activities
it regulates. We continue to support this separation.
4.2 It is of utmost importance that the
Gambling Commission is well resourced for its new responsibilities
and completely transparent in its actions. Business In Sport and
Leisure believes that the Codes of Practice and Guidance which
will govern the industry and local authorities, must be published
for consultation while the Scrutiny Committee is considering the
Bill. This does not seem to be the priority for the Gaming Board
and DCMS are raising questions about cost, as the Gambling Commission
cannot become a "Shadow" organisation until the Second
Reading of the Bill. The industry has already offered to provide
expertise and funding to take this process forward and BISL would
urge the Scrutiny Committee to resolve this issue as soon as possible.
5. LOCAL AUTHORITY
POWERS
5.1 Business In Sport and Leisure believe
that clear guidance must be given by the Gambling Commission to
local authorities. Local authorities will become responsible for
the Premises Licence for all gambling premises. Regulation of
premises in a sector which has not caused problems in the past
should be light and it is essential that any conditions on the
premises licence should be proportionate and necessary. BISL believes
that all conditions should be set down in national guidance by
the Gambling Commission.
6. DEMAND VERSUS
NEED
6.1 The Gambling Bill and all DCMS policy
documents make it clear that the "Demand Criteria" for
all forms of gambling will be abolished. This however, will be
meaningless if local authorities use their powers under planning
legislation to refuse planning permission for new premises under
a heading of "Need". We have already seen these powers
used to refuse planning permission for premises with a liquor
licence and these decisions have been upheld by the Planning Inspectorate
and by the Courts. There is a real need for joined up Government
to ensure that that the removal of the Demand criteria really
does work in practice.
7. SOCIAL BALANCE
7.1 It is absolutely essential that the
Gambling Bill is balanced to provide protection for the vulnerable
in our society and in particular, protection for children.
7.2 BISL believes that the Bill is more
than adequate to avoid proliferation and goes further than the
Budd Report envisaged. The Government seems clear that machines
which currently have a prize of £25 (currently AWP machines,
to become Category C under the Gambling Bill) and above, should
only be available in premises where access by children is either
not permitted or is controlled. The decision to allow three £250
jackpot machines in clubs (where children are allowed access),
does not however sit well with the restriction of two AWP or Category
C machines in premises with a liquor licence and could restrict
innovation and choice of style of games.
7.3 Business In Sport and Leisure supports
the British Beer and Pub Association (BBPA) in their campaign
to have four machines as of right in licensed premises. There
is a real concern that the viability of many pubs will be affected
if this increase is not permitted. It has now been made clear
that pubs and other licensed premises will have "Grandfather
Rights" to the number of machines they have when the Bill
is introduced. BISL believes that Guidance from the Gambling Commission
to local authorities should make it clear that machines should
only be removed, when the new legislation is implemented, where
there is real evidence that access by children is not being controlled.
7.4 Evidence from the BISL research, who
engaged external market research companies to undertake qualitative
and quantitative research for the E & Y study revealed that:
— 83 per cent of the population have
few issues with the placement of gaming machines in casinos, betting
shops and bingo clubs;
— 76 per cent have few issues with
pubs and clubs; but
— only 31 per cent are supportive of
machines in takeaways and cafes.
8. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
OF OPERATORS
8.1 All members of Business In Sport and
Leisure support the need to behave responsibly as operators of
gambling premises. BISL has supported all members who have made
contributions to the Gambling Industry Charitable Trust, either
individually or through their trade associations.
8.2 BISL believes that clear notices on
machines to prevent under 18 playing on them, training for staff
to deal with problem gamblers and support for GamCare and Gordon
House must be encouraged by the Gambling Commission.
8.3 There is also a need for education on
gambling to be provided for school age children. BISL believes
that DCMS should be working with DfES to include advice on gambling
in the curriculum for PSHE (Personal Social, Health and Safety
Education).
9. THE AUSTRALIAN
EXPERIENCE
9.1 Much has been made of the rise in problem
gamblers as a result of deregulation in Australia. As the Ernst
& Young research points out the Gambling laws in Australia
are regulated by individual states, rather than nationally. The
gaming machines available in hotels and clubs in Australia are
the same machines with high stakes and prizes which only exist
in casinos in the UK, where visitors have to be over the age of
18. BISL believes that the balance of the proposed UK legislation,
which only allows low stake and low prize machines outside premises
for over 18s, will not lead to problem gambling as experienced
in Australia. Machines will of course also only be located in
sites where they are viable.
10. DETAILED
COMMENTS ON
THE BILL
10.1 Business In Sport and Leisure has the
following detailed comments on the Bill:
10.2 Appeals: "A Safe Bet for
Success" made it clear that the Government accepted the requirement
for there to be a full right of appeal on both issues of law and
merits of the case. The Gambling Bill only provides for appeals
to the Magistrates and an appeal to the High Court, but only on
points of law.
10.3 BISL believes that appeals on both
issues of law and merit should be permitted to the Crown Court.
This helps both the local authority and the Court, as well as
the applicant. The Crown Court brings a degree of objectivity
which helps decide issues without the need to go to the High Court,
which is costly, time consuming and slow. Regularly magistrates
are reluctant to decide on a matter, particularly if it is new
or controversial and therefore refuse an application, knowing
that the appeal will then go the Crown Court for further guidance.
Such guidance is usually gratefully received by the magistrate
and often the local authority and prevents appeals in the future.
The appeal process is generally only used in cases of real need
and therefore does not overburden the court system.
10.4 Orders for Costs: BISL believes
that the Bill should give explicit powers to Magistrates to award
costs against either party, including the local authority. It
would be helpful if the basis on which costs can be ordered could
be the same for the local authority as for other parties (excluding
the police.)
10.5 Oral Representations: BISL believes
that the Gambling Commission should hold an oral hearing at which
the applicant and their representative can appear to make representations.
At the moment there seems to be no compunction on the Commission
to do this, even if the application is refused.
10.6 Capacity: Section 67(b)(ii)
provides powers to the Gambling Commission to put capacity limits
on any gambling premises. This is not a provision which appears
in the current Act. BISL believes that this must be used with
great care. It would be an unnatural restraint if an applicant
for a bingo club was licensed for 500, but not 550 people. BISL
would prefer this provision to be removed.
10.7 Renewal of Licence: Section
91(3) provides for a window of two months, for an applicant to
apply for a renewal. This seems unnecessarily restrictive. There
ought to be a provision allowing for late renewal to be considered
by the Gambling Commission, if there is a good reason.
10.8 Provisional Statements: Section
116 provides for a provisional statement or provisional licence
to be granted to an operator before he starts investing in the
site. It does however, also allow the application to be refused
on final grant, if for example a local resident could not have
made representation at the time of the original hearing, or there
has been a change of circumstance eg a similar facility has opened
nearby. BISL believes that this will lead to operators investing
heavily in a new development without any certainty that they will
be allowed to operate this facility when it is completed. This
creates a lack of certainty that is totally unfair on investors
or operators of these sites. These provisions as currently written
are ineffective legislation. BISL believes that a provisional
grant must provide a promise to the successful applicant that
if they complete the premises in accordance with the deposited
plans and are considered a fit and proper person, that they will
be given their final grant.
10.9 Surrender of Operating Licence:
The Bill states that an operating licence is surrendered if
the licences notifies the Commission about it and gives the Commission
either the licence or a statement, saying why it cannot produce
it. This statement is badly worded and could have serious ramifications
for other interested parties eg shareholders, holding companies
etc are not notified or have not given their agreement. BISL believes
their should be re-worded.
11. BETTING EXCHANGES
11.1 Business In Sport and Leisure supports
the Association of British Bookmakers (ABB) who believe that Betting
Exchanges should be regulated by the new Gambling Commission and
that the "layer" should pay a 15 per cent Gross Profits
Tax on their winnings.
11. CONCLUSION
11.1 As a unique organisation representing
companies in the gambling sector, Business In Sport and Leisure
hopes that the Committee will call us to give oral evidence to
discuss these views and other issues further.
December 2003
| 
