Devolve powers on regulating gambling to local authorities, say MPs

More powers should be devolved to local authorities when it comes to the regulation of gambling, MPs have said.

In a report, the Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee argued that councils had the local knowledge to assess their impact. Central regulation should meanwhile exist to “ensure high standards of protection for the vulnerable, particularly children”.

The committee claimed that the Gambling Act 2005 had resulted in “numerous inconsistencies” and was not sufficiently evidence based.

The report contains a series of recommendations, including a call for local authorities to have the ability to decide whether or not they want a casino in their area.

“As a step towards this, existing 1968 Act Casino licences should be made portable, allowing operators to relocate to any local authority provided that they have the consent of that local authority,” the committee said.

“The portability of these licences would be constrained by the existing 'triple lock' contained in the Gambling Act: that is, the need to obtain local authority approval, a premises licence and planning permission.”

Other recommendations contained in the report included:

  • An independent review of Gambling Commission expenditure should be carried out as soon as possible after a new system for remote licensing is in place, “with a view to reducing costs and the regulatory and fees burden imposed on the industry”.
  • Casinos which are highly regulated and have strictly restricted access—should be allowed to operate up to 20 B2-type gaming machines with a maximum stake of £100 (“instead of the current four, which is the same limit as for high street betting shops”).
  • Where there are clusters of betting shops "because each of them is allowed only four of the B2 gaming machines", local authorities should also be able to increase the machine allowance if they think this would reduce or solve the ‘clustering’ problem.
  • The Gambling Commission should introduce a new licence fee structure “which reduces the current anomaly where small, independent bookmakers pay much higher fees per shop than large chains”.
  • The Gambling Commission should provide the gambling industry with a clear and easily accessible summary of where the fees it charges are spent as a part of its Annual Report.
  • The hard evidence base for decisions and regulation should be improved: “the Government must ensure that high-quality, independent research, comparable over time, is available to be able to assess the scale of problem gambling and the impact – if any – of changes in regulation”.

John Whittingdale MP, Chair of the Committee, said: "Gambling is now widely accepted in the UK as a legitimate entertainment activity. We took a lot of evidence in this inquiry, from all sides, and while we recognise the need to be aware of the harm caused by problem gambling, we believe that there is considerable scope to reduce and simplify the current burden of regulation and to devolve decision-making to a more local level. However, given how emotive an issue gambling is in many quarters, there is a worrying lack of proper research to inform policy: this is something that needs to be addressed.

“The 'reluctantly permissive' tone of gambling legislation over the last 50 years now looks outdated. It is also inadequate to cope with the realities of the global market in online gambling, and even seems ill-equipped to cope with the realities on our high streets. Our general approach in this report has therefore been to support liberalisation of rules and delegation of decisions to those closest to the communities that will be affected."

However, the committee’s recommendations in relation to clustering of betting shops have been sharply criticised by the Local Government Association.

Cllr Clyde Loakes, Vice Chair of the Association's Environment and Housing Board, said: "While it is an important step that the CMS Committee has recognised that the clustering of betting shops is a concern for local people, their response to the problem is completely illogical. It's clearly not sensible to increase the number of slot machines in betting shops to tackle the problem of too many slot machines.

"Councils and local residents have consistently argued for greater powers to address clustering, but this has been overlooked. Clusters of any type of premise, from bookies, to fast food takeaways to strip clubs, can be harmful to growth as it drives people away from their local high streets. It is often a local issue, and so this is best served by a local solution – whether this is through the use class system or reform of complex ‘Article 4 directions'."

A spokesman for the Gambling Commission said: “We are pleased to see the publication of the select committee’s report on the Gambling Act 2005. Clearly we need time to digest the report and consider the recommendations made.
 
“We will be supporting the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in preparing their formal response to the Committee later in the year. The formal response will take account of developments since the Committee took evidence back in 2011 and January 2012.”

A copy of the CMS committee report, The Gambling Act 2005: A bet worth taking?, can be found here.