Joint Committee on the Draft Gambling Bill Written Evidence


Memorandum from the Gala Group (DGB 11)

1.  INTRODUCTION

  1.1  In response to the invitation to submit written evidence on the draft Gambling Bill and as Britain's leading gaming operator, Gala is pleased to outline its views to the Joint Committee.

  1.2  The Gala Group operates in Great Britain from 166 licensed Bingo Clubs and 27 Licensed Casinos, with a further two under construction. In addition Gala operates gaming complexes in Gibraltar and on the Isle of Man. The Group currently employs circa 10,000 people and has circa 33 million admissions to its businesses per annum.

  1.3  Gala has no higher priority than corporate social responsibility and community involvement. We are an active member of "Business in the Community", a qualified member of the "Investors in People" programme, encourage enormous volumes of local community support in those areas where we operate, contribute to the Gaming Industry Charitable Trust, and take a leading role in the charity efforts of both the Casino and Bingo trade associations.

  1.4  We recognise that any expansion in the Gambling sector has risks. However, we believe they are controllable and can be minimised. Gala would intend to take a leading role in that effort.

  1.5  Gala fully supports the philosophy behind the proposals for new legislation, and contends that:

    —  Economic Benefit—Research undertaken by Pion Economics on behalf of the Cross-Industry Group for Gaming Deregulation concluded that the new Gambling Act will increase net output by up to £8 billion per anuum, create more than 100,000 new jobs and generate an additional £3 billion per annum, in tax revenue for the Exchequer. The proposed legislative framework will allow the UK to become the global centre of responsible, well regulated gaming, as part of a diverse and consumer orientated leisure sector.

    —  Regulatory Risk—It is Gala's contention that a new Gambling Act is not just a "one way street" of economic growth for operators, it is also an urgent necessity in terms of effective regulation and social responsibility. It is clearly a misnomer to refer to the proposed new Gambling Act as "deregulation" as it will tighten regulation in a number of key areas as much as it deregulates in others.

    —  The Central Dilemma—After an extensive and thorough consultation and review process, we believe that the central dilemma of balancing the rights of responsible adults whilst protecting the vulnerable in society has been effectively and fully addressed in these draft proposals. This view is supported by the Business in Sport and Leisure market research of November 2003 which shows that over eighty per cent of the public would not be anti gambling in a properly regulated environment.

2.  SPECIFIC RESPONSES TO THE KEY ISSUES IDENTIFIED IN THE COMMITTEE'S INQUIRY

  2.1  For ease of reference, we have copied the main themes set out in the written submission brief and then given our response where we feel it is appropriate.

3.  THE PROPOSED FUNCTIONS, DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE GAMBLING COMMISSION

  3.1  Gala would like to stress the following general points:

    —  Legislative Clarity—Effective regulation depends on legislative clarity. It is important that all points of legislative principle and any codes of conduct developed by the regulator are clearly laid down and reviewed as a total package.

    —  A Balanced Approach—There is a need to maintain the "balanced approach" proposed by the Gambling Review Body which attempted to balance the legitimate commercial interests of the industry and the rights of responsible adults with the protection of the vulnerable in society.

    —  Orderly Expansion—It should be recognised that there is an enormous difference between orderly expansion and "Casinos on every street corner". The minimum size criteria will be sufficient to control proliferation without restricting economic growth. Current estimates envisage no more than 300 casinos at maturity which would seem to provide the necessary prevention of proliferation.

    —  Competition—Any regulation should not restrict competition, nor should it disadvantage existing operators. See 6.2 also.

    —  National Lottery—We acknowledge that the National Lottery is unique due to its role in generating funds for good causes. However, we feel that as a mass market wagering activity, it should be controlled by the Gambling Commission. Moreover, the minimum age of play should be in line with all other forms of gaming at 18 years and that the Lottery operator should contribute to the Gambling Industry Charitable Trust.

    —  Future Proofing—In the light of the ongoing representations on the linking of machines in casinos, it is recommended that this issue should be left to the discretion of the Gambling Commission, and not as proposed, be determined by primary legislation.

4.  PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AND VULNERABLE PERSONS

  4.1  See 1.3. Gala were at the forefront of successfully establishing the Gambling Industry Charitable Trust and are fully supportive of its brief to raise the £3 million identified as being required to research, educate and treat social issues created by the new Bill. We are confident that this can be achieved through arrangements within the industry but support the concept of a statutory levy if this proves necessary.

5.  THE PROPOSED SECTORAL FRAMEWORK FOR GAMBLING REGULATION

  5.1  Strict criteria must be established to ensure that Local Authorities deal with licence applications in a consistent and balanced way. The draft legislation currently fails to address these key criteria and if this is not resolved, licence applications will inevitably revert back to a form of demand criteria, albeit indirectly, until case law becomes established.

  5.2  The involvement of Regional Planning Bodies should be strictly limited to planning (not licensing) matters relating to "developments of regional significance". Their brief should be to encourage and enable development but not to restrict competition by tendering or granting regional "franchises".

6.  CASINOS

  6.1  Gala has set out its detailed response to issues relating to the casino market in its response to the 7 August position statement which we attach to this submission as Appendix A. We would summarise the main issues as follows:

    —  The proposed three to one ratio of machines to gaming tables will severely damage the competitiveness of existing operators and has no rational basis. Gala recommends retaining the eight to one ratio as this has a rational basis in maintaining a fair balance in the number of available playing positions of either type.

    —  Electronic versions of bankers games should not be classified as machines or as live table games but should be in a category of their own. Classification of these games as machines would make a three to one ratio even more damaging to existing operators.

    —  The linking of machines should be allowed both within and across Casinos with a limit of no more than 500 machines to be linked together at any one time.

    —  The term "available for use" in respect of live table games needs a clear definition which allows operational flexibility. Gala believes that customer demand not regulation should dictate the number of live tables actually open at any given time.

  6.2  We would additionally like to reiterate the world-respected credibility of existing UK gaming operators and that the whole process to update current regulation was not conceived solely to attract overseas investment. Therefore, existing operators should not be completely disadvantaged at the expense of any new entrants due to the proposals on machine numbers and linking between casinos in grandfathered and small casinos.

  6.3  We also propose that the legislation recognises the fundamental difference between the very largest Resort Casinos of "regional significance" and other large (40+ table) casinos. We suggest that the number of machines allowed at large casinos which are not of regional significance could perhaps be limited to 1,250. This would mean that only Resort Casinos would be permitted to have unlimited numbers of machines. This proposal would allow the creation of a small number of Resort casinos in locations directed by the RDAs but also create healthy competition in the main conurbations, without the need for RDA involvement.

7.  BETTING EXCHANGES

  7.1  No relevant comments to make.

8.  REMOTE GAMBLING

  8.1  No relevant comments to make

9.  GAMING MACHINES AND AMUSEMENT WITH PRIZES (AWP) MACHINES

  9.1  It is our view that after all the reviews and evaluations of the gambling market over the last four years and subsequent consultations, the right balance between sectors has been struck and the recommendations are sensible and appropriate.

10.  BINGO CLUBS

  10.1  As the leading bingo operator, Gala would like to stress the fundamental strength and resilience of Bingo which is inherent in its position at the heart of the community in some of the poorest areas of our towns and cities.

  10.2  The draft Bill and other recent deregulation introduce some very sensible and long overdue changes which will help the bingo sector to maintain its strong position in not only the gaming sector but also in our local communities.

  10.3  As a result of the fundamental strength of the bingo product and the proposed changes in the sector, we do not believe that the social element of the bingo experience will be lost and it is unlikely that there will be a mass conversion of Bingo sites to Casinos.

11  TAX IMPLICATIONS

  11.1  Gala would fully support a taxation regime where all forms of gaming were taxed in the same way and at the same rate, provided that the rate was non-draconian.

  11.2  We feel that a "Gross Profit Tax" (GPT) style system would be the appropriate mechanism for delivering betting and gaming taxation, as recently applied to the betting and pools sectors. However, in this scenario, it is vital that there should be no VAT charged on gaming income as there is still in Bingo.

  11.3  We further believe that any change should be delivered as a package of measures and not achieved via a piecemeal application to certain sectors thereby causing further competitive differences during the interim period.

12.  SOCIETY LOTTERIES AND PRIZE COMPETITIONS

  12.1  No relevant comments to make.

December 2003


 
previous page contents next page

House of Lords home page Parliament home page House of Commons home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2004
Prepared 7 April 2004