Joint Committee on the
Draft Gambling Bill (Regional Casinos)
Regional Planning Issues
July 6, 2004
Evidence from Blackpool Council
Introduction
Blackpool is, perhaps, unique in the UK in the steps
it has taken to;
· study
casino gambling in the US - the regulatory frameworks, codes of
practice and social responsibility, styles of operation, marketing
plans and economic and social impacts;
· show
how a cluster of destination casinos will provide the economic
driver for comprehensive resort regeneration and the establishment
of a sustainable local economy;
· embody
proposals for destination casino development within a regeneration
Masterplan and complementary, statutory Local Plan;
· encourage
open discussion and debate on casino gambling issues with local
business and residential communities, formally gauge local public
opinion, and take a clear and transparent position;
· engage
widely with UK and international casino operators.
Blackpool Council will allow and, indeed, encourage
resort type, casino development within specific casino sites,
clearly defined in its deposit, Statutory Local Plan. Applications
that comply with the plan, and are supported by responsible environmental,
economic and social impact assessments, and contribute to the
wider regeneration imperative will be approved. There will be
a presumption against other planning applications for new casinos.
Blackpool is proposing a cluster of casinos within
a conference/casino quarter. This brings opportunities to link
gaming to an overall, urban renewal programme - commercially,
culturally and economically and produce powerful cost, business
development, social and regulatory advantages.
The Call for Clarity and Certainty
Blackpool has examined and commented upon the emerging
gambling legislation with care and objectivity. It has looked
for a legislative framework that will give the responsible organisations
- the Gambling Commission, Regional Planning Bodies and local
councils - the ability to: work together to widen consumer choice
in a planned and measured fashion; make choices; steer and guide
new investment; and deliver approved economic objectives and priorities.
It has looked for a legislative framework that delivers certainty
and clarity.
The Joint Scrutiny Committee
Blackpool Council welcomed the involvement of the
Joint Scrutiny Committee in the legislative review process, its
thoroughness and, in particular, its;
· wish
to avoid the social dangers of proliferation and move forward
with caution, in stages.
· willingness
to recognise and seek to capitalise upon the regeneration potential
of the larger, destination casinos
· call
for unambiguous casino definitions and a sensible integration
of gambling regulation and the Town and Country Planning System.
The Government Response of June 2004
Blackpool Council was encouraged by the Government
response to the First Report of the Joint Committee and particularly
its decisions to;
· accept
the vast majority of the Joint committees recommendations
· adopt
a cautious approach
· propose
a categorisation of casinos that introduces clear blue water between
regional casinos and other casinos
· favour
a UK casino landscape characterised by few large rather than many
small casinos offering access to unlimited prize machines
· adopt
a plan led emphases, reflecting each regions strategic policies
and priorities.
Blackpool Council's Position
The decision to reconvene the Joint Committee and
give further consideration to casino regulation and the role of
regional planning bodies is also welcomed by Blackpool. This is
a very necessary and timely step in the drafting process. Detailed
study of the main report and annex, prepared jointly by DCMS and
ODPM, raises a major fear that the emerging legislative framework
is incomplete and will have unintended and fundamentally unwelcome
consequences. There is still much to do.
Blackpool Council is not convinced that the
legislative framework will;
1. succeed in achieving the Government's strategy
set out in pages 30 and 31 of the June 2004 response, which is
to; direct regional casinos to the most suitable areas; give rise
to a relatively low number of regional casinos; bring about a
gradual development in the casino market.
and
2. arm the responsible bodies with both the means
and the obligation to respond positively to the call made by minister,
Keith Hill- 'to promote economic growth, development and regeneration
in the right places' ensure that, 'casinos as part of large tourism
development make a significant contribution to the local economy
especially in areas that depend on tourism and need regeneration',
see 'Regional Planning Bodies help give such areas a boost through
tourism-led regeneration'
and
3. enable tourism based economies like Blackpool
to realise their regeneration ambitions.
Blackpool Council's concern is influenced by; knowledge
of developer activity; the planning policy vacuum at national
and regional level; opportunities to circumvent the planning system;
ambiguities relating to the size and form of regional casinos,
the casino licensing process and its relationship to the planning
system; and uncertainty relating to the Government's commitment
to the regeneration of tourism areas.
The Planning Policy Vacuum
Government expects regional casinos to be low in
number. It has also proposed that the regeneration benefit should
be captured through the planning system, which will steer regional
casinos to the most suitable areas and obtain contributions to
wider regeneration through planning obligations.
The steering role has been devolved to the Regional
Spatial Strategies and Local Development Plans, which will become
Development Plan Frameworks. The negotiation role relating to
planning obligations will fall on the local planning authorities
- the unitary and district councils.
In circumstances where;
· development
may be limited to, perhaps, 15-25 regional casinos across the
UK,
· Regional
Spatial Strategies and compliant Development Plan Frameworks do
not yet exist and there is impatience in the market
· intense,
short lived competition between operators and between councils
is inevitable
· operator
preferences relating to location will not always coincide with
regeneration preferences or priorities
It is essential that the planning system has the
ability to react quickly and consistently, cast its net over all
regional casino proposals, and deliver robust decisions that will
create certainty and confidence in the market.
National Guidance
This will not be achieved without clearer guidance
from Government to Regional Planning Bodies on the priorities
they should express in their region specific, casino policies.
This guidance could usefully;
1 recognise that Regional Planning Bodies
will need to make choices and in this respect have regard to need,
opportunity and impact.
2 define regeneration and take a stronger
position on securing regeneration priorities (in
defining regeneration there is a need to demonstrate that decisions
will create genuine and sustainable social and economic regeneration
benefits and not simply create jobs and lead to distortions in
the market.)
3 express in this guidance, priorities that
reflect the pronouncements made by Keith Hill and other ministers
relating to tourism economies in need of regeneration where alternative
economic drivers are unavailable.
Emerging Government guidance, (annex, paras 17,18),
requires Regional Spatial Strategies to establish the locational
criteria appropriate to regionally or sub-regionally significant
leisure uses or to identify the broad location of major leisure
developments. Regional Spatial Strategies will not succeed in
delivering the desired regeneration benefits, and creating certainty
and confidence in the market if they seek to guide regional casino
investment in this way.
Specificity
If there is a serious desire within Government
to direct regional casino development to the most appropriate
areas, secure regeneration benefits, and give the market the certainty
it desires, then there is an obvious need for specificity. Government
guidance provides for specificity in RSS and Government could
usefully inform regional planning bodies that regional casino
development could be directed to specific rather than broad locations
by;
1 defining regional casinos
as exceptional development (in circumstance
where there may only be 15 in the UK, 4-5 in London and 1-3 per
region then this is surely an exceptional form of development)
or
2 defining appropriate inward investment sites
for regional casino development
3 This guidance could also usefully advise
regional planning bodies of the need to secure appropriate levels
of casino development by assessing the need and impact of casino
development on a regional basis in a formal way as part of the
policy making process. (This
is not a complex task. The major players in the casino industry
have their own views about potential casino numbers nationally
and regionally based on familiar desk top capacity studies, examining
demographics, accessibility, socio-economic profile and potential
participation rates. Publication of objective based assessments
and strategic policies at regional level will help to describe
the big picture and lead to national consistency)
In circumstances where the will be relatively low
numbers of regional casinos the plan led approach will succeed
only if it is given an opportunity to inform every development
decision that precedes a premises licence for a regional casino.
There is a danger that this will not be the case.
There is a concern that planning permissions granted for casinos
above 5,000 square meters in advance of the act, many in areas
allocated for town centre, or leisure or mixed uses, where there
is no requirement for call-in or referral to the minister, will
obtain a premises licence for a regional casino under the transition
arrangements. The potential for change of use within the existing
D2 Use Class to casino use, without any reference to the planning
system is also a major concern. This potential has been accentuated
by the regional casino definition. Operators will be able to site
40 tables, 1000 machines, other gaming activity and the required
non-gambling areas within a gross floor space of around 6,000
square meters. This volume of space is present in many existing
D2 premises. Operators will also be able to expand small casinos
into adjoining D2 leisure uses without reference to the planning
system and to grow small casinos into regional scale casinos through
the premises licensing process. The compulsion to do so and avoid
the otherwise attendant planning obligations will be great.
Removing Ambiguities, Plugging the Holes
If Government is to give the regional planning
bodies and local councils a genuine opportunity to direct regional
casinos to the most appropriate areas and obtain regeneration
benefits then it must seek to address the ambiguities and plug
the holes. Government could do so effectively by;
Placing regional casinos within a sui generis
use class. (The successful
regional casino will be a 24/7 operation, accommodating 3500 to
5000 customers per day, Monday to Friday, 14,000 to 20,000 customers
per day Saturday and Sunday, more than 3.0m customers per year.
Comparative figures for small casinos are, 300-400 customers per
day Monday to Friday, 400-600 customers per day Saturday and Sunday,
less than 200,000 customers per year. The regional casino
will clearly be associated with a scale and pattern of customer
flow over each 24 hour period, and associated environmental, economic
and social impacts that differentiates it, in land - use terms,
from other casinos and other D2 uses.)
1 Creating a Regional
Casino Premises Licence, and requiring the licensing authorities
to issue such licenses to premises only where they benefit from
an appropriate planning permission.(This
approach is entirely consistent with the June response which seeks
to protect existing interests but does not confuse this with protecting
future hopes of profit. Although there is a reference to regional
casino licences in the June response DCMS officials have since
stated that there is no intention to create a specific Regional
Casino Licence.)
The Size and Form of Regional Casinos
Parameters defining the size and make-up of casino
properties may not produce the desired casino product or desired
patterns of development. Profit motive, a competitive market and
operator inventiveness and ingenuity will inevitably produce unexpected
development responses.
Blackpool called for clearer, more prescriptive definitions
and differentiation between the largest casinos and other casinos.
It feared that the market would respond to the draft bill by investing
in relatively high numbers of casinos in the middle category.
This would give rise to proliferation and, inevitably, undermine
confidence in destination casino development and the prospect
of resort regeneration. Blackpool advocated 2 categories - boutique
casinos and resort casinos, separated by clear blue water.
The June response by Government has delivered clear
blue water and many of the recommendations made by the Joint Committee.
There is;
· differentiation
- the ceiling level for large casinos is set
at 150 machines, restricted to category 'B'. The entry level for
regional casinos is set at 1,000 machines, with no restriction
on category of machine.
· definition
- the regional casino
has a 1250 machine ceiling, a 1:25 table to machine ratio and
a minimum net area of 5,000 square metres.
There is an expectation that the June proposals will
deliver relatively low numbers of large, multi dimensional casino
complexes, providing significant numbers of jobs and other local
regeneration benefits through supply chains and additional leisure
and cultural facilities. If this is to be achieved it is necessary
to anticipate possible operator responses and recognise that the
proposed definitions may not, in their current form, necessarily
encourage this type of investment decision, particularly where
there is no requirement to do so.
Emerging operator proposals and models encompass
a wide range of product types with net floor space ranging from
85% to 30% of gross floor space with interest focusing on casinos
with a gross floor space area of 7,000 to 10,000 square metres.
In the 85% net: 100% gross space ratio, a gross floor space of
7,000 square metres produces a regional casino at the cap level,
which can operate effectively in gaming shed form on 2 floors
and a fairly modest footprint. Clearly, Government does not envisage
a casino landscape in the UK dominated by this type of property,
perhaps, in unforeseen numbers.
Expanding the Definition
In a context of slowly emerging RSS and associated
Local Development Frameworks specifying the form and content of
casino developments, Government could usefully assist casino operators
and planning authorities by;
2 Expanding the definition of regional casino
with a net:gross floor space ratio that more clearly reflects
the Governments intention and firm, more descriptive narrative
guidance on the make-up of the entire casino development.
Regeneration Of Tourism Areas
The June response has confirmed the Government intention
to guide regional casino development through the formal statutory
planning system. It has referred to National Policy on Regional
Spatial Strategies, Planning for Town Centres and Transport as
the policy references and guiding influences it will apply in
advising Regional Planning Bodies. With this focus the regeneration
emphasis in the recommendations of the Joint Committee has been
diluted and there is, of course, no reference to national guidance
on tourism development and the priority the Government attaches
to the regeneration of tourism economies.
Blackpool clearly feels that Government could
usefully have;
1. Referred to Government Policy on Tourism
and, particularly Tourism Regeneration.
2. Used the Joint Statement to advise Regional
Planning Bodies and casino operators of its intention to see resort
regeneration.
Appendix 1
| Chris Bone,
Department for Culture, Media and Sport
2/4 Cockspur Street
London
SW1Y 5DH
| Our Ref: RCH/JH
Direct Dial: 01253 476200
Date: 28 May 2004
|
| Dear Chris |
| Emerging Gambling Legislation
|
Your willingness on May 21, both to listen and engage in general
discussion about the issues we raised and the questions we posed
was greatly appreciated. Please pass on my thanks to your colleague.
You will understand, I am sure, that the emerging legislation
will have far reaching implications for Blackpool. As yet, it
is unclear whether these will be positive and associated with
major development or negative and associated with further decline
of our traditional resort product. It is against this background
that we are seeking to improve our understanding both of the emerging
legislation and the casino landscape it may create in this country.
Gambling Legislation and the Planning System
I outlined Blackpool's concerns relating to the above and let
you know of my intention to write to Michael Bach at ODPM. I have
attached a copy of my letter to Michael, together with a paper,
forwarded to the Joint Committee, after the evidence sessions
ended. There is also a recent letter to the Blackpool MP, Gordon
Marsden, which was prompted by Yvette Cooper's evidence to the
Joint Committee.
I do hope that these enclosures will help you to recognise that
Blackpool has taken a thoughtful position on the liberalisation
of gambling and shares with Ministers their wish to avoid proliferation,
impulse gambling and the attendant social problems. You may also
find that my letter will generate some useful thoughts.
The Timing of the Gambling Act and Casino Permissions
The Budd report demonstrated that it is futile to resist growth
in gambling in a mature society engaged in Information Technology.
Against this background my Council has therefore looked carefully
at the emerging Gambling legislation and the Planning Acts. It
has looked for measures that will arm both licensing and planning
authorities with the means to manage this growth, avoid proliferation
and capture regeneration benefits.
Concerns about proliferation relate to accessibility to potentially
harmful forms of gambling and particularly to machine gambling.
My Council would, therefore, define proliferation as a pattern
of opportunity, a conspicuous, 'door step' convenience, that is
likely to give rise to high levels and
regular patterns of participation that are harmful both to individuals
and local communities. It therefore favours a regulatory device
that will produce few large, rather than many small casinos.
Blackpool also favours a 'clustered' approach, and the opportunities
it brings to link gaming to an overall, urban renewal program
- commercially, culturally and economically.
There are powerful cost, business development, social, and regulatory
advantages. The cluster forms a destination and will attract an
out of town customer base and potential overseas customer, as
opposed to local drive-in customers. In this environment the destination
casino is largely used by a visitor population that has made a
conscious decisions to make a dedicated trip as part of a wider
leisure experience. Research shows that 75% of Blackpool's customer
base will live outside the Granada TV region.
The out of town customer takes a short break, leading to ancillary
business such as conventions, hotels, food and beverage and non-gaming
options. The cluster is much easier to oversee/regulate and the
many fixed operating costs are also scalable across more than
one casino property and, indeed, across the entire renewal area.
Blackpool supports the view that a free market in the provision
of casinos will produce many casinos in a widely distributed pattern,
because investment will focus on supplying customers as cheaply
as possible and as close as possible to where they live and work.
US research shows that casino catchments will be relatively local
and participation rates will be as high as 30% of the catchment
populations in this 'distributed' casino landscape. The catchment
population will gamble in the casino more frequently, because
marketing and promotion campaigns will seek to excite this catchment
population rather than a national/international leisure seeker.
There will be greater displacement of casino spending and a questionable
local benefit.
The evidence presented to the Joint Committee suggests that Government
wishes to create a regulatory environment that will keep the expansion
in casinos within a number that feels acceptable. Its ideal scenario
is, I am sure, a casino landscape featuring small and large casinos
that will capture the benefits of regeneration and avoid proliferation.
Blackpool Council is fearful that Government will produce a regulatory
device that is well intentioned but is burdened by complexity
and loopholes and will produce what Government fears most, which
is; too many casinos; too little regeneration benefit in the right
places; and too many negative, social impacts.
At this time, Blackpool is not an investment target for the major
US operators. In the absence of any guidelines directing resort
casinos to resort locations like Blackpool the operators are focusing
on a distributed approach, and on 'local drive-in markets' served
by highly accessible sites within the major urban conurbations.
Here, we have a market determined approach undermining a national
regeneration agenda. These same operators have, of course, let
Blackpool know that it is still within their sights and will become
a priority investment location if there is national guidance,
clear, strategic development policies and an associated regulatory
environment.
Clear Blue Water
Blackpool Council would plead for simplicity and a regulatory
environment that is;
· built
upon a solid and sensible link between the licensing and planning
processes.
· is designed
to ensure that, 'Casinos as part of large tourism development
can make a significant contribution to the local economy especially
in areas that depend on tourism and need regeneration.' Minister,
Keith Hill.
My Council would advocate 2 categories of casino
that are clearly differentiated, with the larger casinos having
the scale and presence to compete internationally, appeal to a
Euro spending customer and produce a net gain to the exchequer.
It would also advocate a regulatory environment that
signals the Government's wish to see an existing and very British
product evolve and grow in number in a measured and cautious way.
Blackpool favours an expansion in the number of casinos based
on few large, rather than many small casinos, and a planned pattern
of development that realises the ambition contained in the statement
made by Minister, Keith Hill.
This differentiation could be expressed in many ways.
Blackpool's suggestion is as follows;
Casino Category Gaming Area (msq) No
of tables Table:Machine Ratio
Boutique 500 - 1,000 20 - 40 1:3
(It will be necessary to give the regulatory
body the power to curtail or encourage investment in this sector
by adjusting the table:machine ratio and policing overall numbers
to avoid the dangers of proliferation and its attendant problems.)
Destination > 15,000 60 - 100 1:20
Destination > 1,500 60 - 100 1:20
(There will need to be
a definition of the Destination/Resort casino in terms of its
make-up and its expected contribution to regeneration. There will
also need to be national guidance on priority locations and a
clear role for the Regional Planning Body in delivering the regeneration
benefits in accordance with this national guidance.
Blackpool would define a destination casino as an
entertainment complex providing a variety of gambling and gaming
opportunities, hotel accommodation, conferencing, live entertainment,
food and beverage, and perhaps, specialty retailing, health and
fitness suites, night club and spa, developed as an integral part
of a wider leisure experience.)
If the Government's 3 original objectives are to
be achieved and areas that depend upon tourism and are in need
of regeneration are to benefit then it is essential that there
is;
· clear
national guidance on regeneration priorities
· casinos
are given sui generis status in the Planning System
· planning
permissions are regarded as an essential pre-entry qualification
to the premises licensing procedure.
· applications
for premises licenses should only be accepted for consideration
if the necessary planning permission post dates the gambling act
and the relevant regional/national casino development guidance.
I do hope that you will be able to give this letter
your serious consideration and will be able to let me know of
your response to the issues and ideas it raises.
My best Wishes,
Reg Haslam
Head, New Horizons Team
Cc: Gordon Marsden MP
Joan Humble MP
Keith Barnes.Regional Director, GONW
| Michael Bach,
Head of Branch in Planning Policy
Eland House
Bressendon Place
London
SW1E 5DU
| Our Ref: RCH/JH
Direct Dial: 01253 476200
Date: 28 May 2004
|
Dear Michael |
|
| Emerging Gambling Legislation and the Planning System
|
I do hope that you can recall our recent telephone conversation
relating to the above, the concerns I expressed about the proposed
changes to the Use Classes Order and, in particular, the retention
of casinos within Use Class D2. As you know, the Joint Committee
on Gambling Legislation, chaired by John Greenway, has also expressed
this concern.
During our conversation you stated that the ODPM does not wish
to become involved in the micro management of casinos. You also
indicated that you have consulted widely on the proposed changes
to the Use Classes Order and this has revealed that the existing
casino industry does not wish to see casinos removed from Use
Class D2. You expressed the view that against this background
the Department is reluctant to make further changes to the Order.
This is surprising given the peculiar nature of casinos, the machine
orientated form they will take in a liberalised environment, and
decisions made in the past to place amusement arcades in a sui
generis category and more recently, of course, to leave this categorisation
unchanged.
It is important to recognise that during the period January 2002
to April 2002, when views on possible changes to the Use Classes
Order were invited, local councils were simply not familiar with
the extent or nature of the changes that could take place in the
casino market as a consequence of gambling liberalisation. Furthermore,
Councils did not have any indication of the possible reactions
of the gambling industry to liberalisation and the development
scenarios that might emerge. Since that time awareness has been
growing as the debate has acquired knowledge and momentum in both
the public and private sectors. The regeneration imperative has
emerged, there has been a great deal of discussion about the need
for a sensible relationship between gambling and planning legislation
and many organisations, including my own, have assumed that issues
relating to the Use Classes Order would be resolved in a joined-up
and constructive way.
Blackpool's Evidence to the Joint Committee
You will be familiar with the evidence that was presented to the
Joint Committee, its report and recommendations, and the references
made in its report to the submissions made on behalf of Blackpool
Borough Council. These make specific reference to potential issues
arising from the timing of planning permissions and the enactment
of the gambling bill, and the inclusion of casinos in Use Class
D2. The enclosed paper, forwarded to the Joint Committee, after
the evidence sessions ended, and my letters to the Blackpool MP,
Gordon Marsden and Chris Bone at DCMS, set out Blackpool's position.
Clearly, I am aware of;
· the
Deputy Prime Minister's wish to see regeneration benefits flow
from the new legislation
· the
position that has been taken by Minister, Keith Hill as quoted
below, 'Planning Bodies will promote economic growth, development
and regeneration in the right places. Casinos as part of large
tourism development can make a significant contribution to the
local economy especially in areas that depend on tourism and need
regeneration. I want to see Regional Planning bodies help give
such areas a boost through tourism-led regeneration.'
· the
belief within the ODPM that the Planning and Compulsory Purchase
Act creates a legislative environment, that will allow the regions
in England to guide and control the spatial pattern of regionally
significant casinos.
My Council welcomes the position taken by the ODPM
on regeneration, and, indeed, the general position taken by the
Joint Committee on Gambling. It is fearful, however, that the
necessary planning systems and procedures will not be in place
early enough and will not be well enough armed to secure the desired
outcomes.
Capturing the Regeneration Benefits and Avoiding
Proliferation
My Council wishes to see clear direction at regional
level and a robust process that will deliver the favoured development
patterns and associated economic and social benefits. It is, however,
concerned that the hugely significant, potential benefits of a
plan led system at regional level will be undermined by the reluctance
to remove casinos from Use Class D2. It is also concerned that
this reluctance will undermine attempts to avoid proliferation.
My Council has defined proliferation as a pattern of opportunity,
a conspicuous, 'door step' convenience, that is likely to give
rise to high levels and regular patterns of gambling that are
harmful both to individuals and local communities.
At the heart of this concern is the proposal in the
Gambling Bill to remove the current spatial controls, imposed
by the licensing system through the 'designated areas' provisions
and the unstimulated demand test, and to replace these with the
3 licensing objectives without any clear intention to create sensible
links between the Gambling Bill and the Town and Country Planning
system.
The 3 objectives are to become central to the scheme
of gambling regulation. They will seek to ensure that;
· gambling
is not associated with crime or disorder
· gambling
is conducted in a fair and open way
· the
vulnerable are not harmed or exploited by gambling.
The casino market is highly lucrative, pressure will
be placed on Councils and it would be imprudent to assume that
the intent of the legislation will be respected and obvious loopholes
will not be exploited. It is also necessary to recognise that
the Gambling Act is likely to give rise to an intense but short
lived, period of development and the benefits could easily be
wasted by a sluggish and shorted sighted planning system.
Ministers are concerned about the proliferation of
convenient, 'door step' casinos, and the unwelcome social problems
this will bring. Yet the scheme of regulation will confine the
consideration of applications for casino licenses made in respect
of the operator and thereafter the premises to the areas covered
by the 3 objectives. There will be no economic, social or environmental
impact assessment. Worryingly, it will only be possible to address
these omissions and steer development and investment in the way
envisaged by the Minister, Keith Hill, where planning permission
is required.
In Blackpool the Statutory local plan designates
a casino development zone and requires the submission of supporting
social, economic and environmental impact studies. This approach
makes sense in so many ways but will become ineffective window
dressing, if operators can pursue developments outside the zone
without any recall to the planning system.
The Importance of a Sui Generis Status for Casinos
Clearly, if the Use Classes Order remains unchanged
planning permission will not be required where changes of use
that create casinos take place within Use Class D2. The potential
to create the doorstep gambling that Government does not wish
to see will be enormous.
Within the casino industry it is common knowledge
that Rank will seek to convert 60 bingo halls into casinos. The
Chief Executive of Bannatyne stated at a recent conference in
Edinburgh that the Health and Fitness market was mature, that
there was over provision and that his company will seek to address
this situation and grow income by converting health and fitness
centres to casinos. The cinema and night club markets are also
mature and operators are facing the same issues and considering
the same opportunities as Bannatyne. I am sure that you and your
colleagues in the ODPM, could cite many more examples of potential
for unregulated, land use change within Use Class D2 and proliferation
of casino gambling.
There are also real dangers in respect of regionally
significant casino development. An international operator could,
for example, purchase a chain of cinemas and establish a pattern
of resort casino development without reference to the regional
planning bodies or their plan led, regeneration strategies. Here,
there is an opportunity to avoid the legal agreements that will
be attached to planning permissions for the largest casinos and
a compelling financial incentive to use the loop holes.
This could also occur in other ways. For example,
the North West region could decide that resort casinos are to
be located in Liverpool and Blackpool. Other areas in the region
with investment ambitions and very limited resources could feel
aggrieved. A proposal in one of these areas, to develop a large
scale leisure building, including cinema, bingo, health and fitness,
sport and recreation uses and, perhaps, a small casino is submitted
and approved. The development is completed, and the Council is
presented with a prospect of further development bringing associated
'public good' and a resort casino within the original development
that can be introduced without the need for a resort casino, planning
permissions or reference to the regional planning body and its
regeneration test.
The Timing of the Gambling Act and Casino Permissions
Clearly, if there is to be a sensible relationship
between the Gambling Act and the Planning System, and there are
to be effective Regional Policies that will capture the regeneration
benefits then;
· planning
permission must be regarded as a necessary entry qualification
to the premises licensing procedure.
· planning
permission granted in advance of the Gambling Act and regional/national
development guidance should not provide entry to the premises
licensing procedure.
Managing Casino Development
I do hope that you will be able to give this letter
and its enclosures your detailed consideration and will recognise
that;
· the
planning system has a legitimate and very significant role to
play in capturing regeneration benefits
· the
Use Classes Order does present an obstacle that will seriously
dull the effectiveness of the planning system
· there
is a need to address the timing issue and determine an operational
date for a linked planning and licensing process.
I also hope that you will be able to reply to this
letter by responding to the issues it raises and describes.
I look forward to hearing from you.
My Best Wishes
Reg Haslam
Head, New Horizons Team
Cc: Gordon Marsden MP
Joan Humble MP
Keith Barnes, Regional Director, GONW
| 
