Joint Committee on the Draft Gambling Bill First Report


Supplementary memorandum from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DGB 183)

  1.  Note on transition funding available to the Gaming Board

  2.  Supplementary note on the interaction between planning permission and gambling premises licensing.

1.  TRANSITION FUNDING AVAILABLE TO THE GAMING BOARD

  1.  The Department took note of Peter Dean's letter of 21 January 2004 to the Committee chairman.

  2.  We have no comments to add to those of Mr Dean on the issue of regulating betting exchanges.

  3.  The Department has received the request from the Gaming Board for £2.5 million for financial year 2004-05 to fund additional work on transition. We are planning to make additional money available to the Board during financial year 2004-05 to cover their work on transition to the Gambling Commission.

  4.  The Department also acknowledges the issues raised by Peter Dean in paragraphs 8 and 9 of his letter. In practical terms alone, it would be ideal if the Board were able to spend money now on the full range of preparations necessary for the assumption of the new responsibilities it will carry as the Gambling Commission. Nonetheless, the Department accepts that the activities of the Board in this transitional period will continue to be constrained by Government Accounting rules that require Parliamentary consent before expenditure can be incurred on practical preparations for new services. The Department does hope, however, that following parliamentary consent it will be possible for the Board to make substantial progress during the 2004-05 financial year with the resources provided by the Department for this purpose. Government Accounting rules do also make provision for some preparatory expenditure following second reading of the relevant Bill.

2.  THE INTERACTION BETWEEN PLANNING PERMISSION AND GAMBLING PREMISES LICENSING FOR CASINOS

  1.  The Department provided, late last year, a note on the interaction between planning permission and gambling premises licensing for casinos. That note focussed on appeals available in the two systems, which was a subject of discussion at the time.

  2.  The Committee has asked for a further explanation of the system. This is noted below.

  3.  DCMS is at present involved in discussions with colleagues in other Departments, notably the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, following on from the joint statement from our two Departments of 7 August 2003. The Government plans to give further clarification about the role of regional planning bodies in England in considering planning permission for the largest casinos.

THE PROCESS:

Applications

  1.  The operator applies to the planning authority for planning permission, if a change in the use of the relevant premises (or intended construction) requires permission.

  2.  If not already in possession of an operating licence, the operator applies to the Gambling Commission for an operating licence.

  3.  The operator may apply to the gambling licensing authority for a provisional statement in relation to the premises. If the authority grants the provisional statement, its rights to then refuse the full premises licence are restricted[4]. The applicant may also apply for a full premises licence at the outset.

Appeals

  4.  If planning permission is not granted, the applicant may appeal. If permission is granted, local persons who made representations have no right of appeal, but may seek judicial review of the decision.

  5.  If the application for the operating licence is refused, the applicant may appeal to the Gambling Appeals Tribunal. There is no role for third parties.

  6.  If the application for a provisional statement, or a full premises licence, is refused, the applicant may appeal. Responsible authorities or interested parties, who opposed the grant of the premises licence, may also appeal against an approval. The appeal is to be heard by the Magistrates in England and Wales.

February 2004



4   The Department has noted comments about the drafting of clause 169, and will consider whether changes should be made to limit the change of circumstances that might be considered relevant. Back


 
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 25 March 2004