Downing Street Says

Asked why the Government had signalled changes to the gambling bill before it had been placed, the PMOS answered that we hoped that the debate in the Commons would allow people to consider the debate in full, and not focus on only one aspect of it. As had been said before, 90% of the bill was to safeguard people, but also to allow consenting adults to gamble. As the DCMS Secretary of State, Tessa Jowell, had also said that any new casinos would have a triple lock placed on them, which consisted of local authorities with wide powers to block new casino applications and also to stop any casinos that abused their power. The local authorities were also in linked up with the Planning Authorities and the Gambling Commission to tighten regulations on all sides. The PMOS also said that the triple lock needed to be emphasised as the debate continued, but sensible ideas would have been brought in, as with any new legislation.

When asked if all the SofS was doing was to mention the new changes, the PMOS replied that people should wait for the debate, but he would again stress not only the triple lock placed on casinos, but also the extra protection the new legislation would place on the most vulnerable gamblers, for example children in fast food outlets. That would stop in 6000 premises.

Asked to clarify the role of the local authority to stop or block casino applications, the PMOS replied that they did have the ability to stop the casinos in that area if the public did not want them in the area. It was further pointed out that the new clause was a blanket ban, so all new casinos, small or large would be banned.

Asked whether a sensible idea would therefore be to only ban "mega casinos", the PMOS said that he was not going to get involved in a line by line debate, and it would be better to wait for the debate in the Commons.

When asked if he was expecting anything new to be announced, the PMOS repeated that it would be better to wait.

Asked about where this bill came in terms of importance in the Commons, the PMOS repeated what the Prime Minister had said last week which was that our current gambling laws were designed for a different time, before internet gambling for example, and there was a good practical, Governmental need to update gambling laws. The Government believed that this was something that needed doing.

Asked about the better regulation of "mega casinos" the PMOS answered that if there was a public demand for such a facility and there already was a gambling industry there, and as the Government was not in the business to tell people how to spend their money or what to do with their time, then they had recognised a need within the terms of the regulation.

Asked about whether the Prime Minister would vote on this matter, the PMOS said that would depend on the other demands of his time.

Asked about the payoff between a big American mega casino planning company who offered a big financial package to build or improve public amenities in return to build a casino, and whether this was something the Government approved of, the PMOS answered that up to 50% of the income from the casinos would come from non-gambling sources. It had therefore been seen that as part of the proposal, there would be a widening of the facilities in those areas in more restaurants, entertainment etc. If those also led, as a result to the regeneration of the area, then that could be seen by the council as a legitimate reason to go ahead. The PMOS emphasised again that all the casino applications and operations would be overseen by the Gambling Commission and if they abused their positions, then the Commission would take action.

Asked if the Government was confident that they could get the gambling bill through both Houses before the General Election in February, the PMOS said that he wondered how long this question would take, but that although people could speculate about all sorts of things, he would speculate about nothing!

Asked if the PM has met anyone from the gambling industry or been lobbied about it, the PMOS replied that officials from No10 had met representatives from the industry, just as they had met representatives from gambling charities, as was proper and correct. The Prime Minister had not met anyone himself from the industry, however, in connection with this bill.

When asked about whether a civil servant had been employed in the gambling industry, the PMOS said that it was a personnel matter and it would be wrong for him to comment.

3 Comments »

More useless waffle….. makes a change !

"the most vulnerable gamblers, for example children in fast food outlets" – so putting the odd \xA31 in a machine is worse than someone betting all their wages in a super casino that you can just walk into without having to register 24hrs beforehand, and being able to drink at the tables further reducing the ability to think clearly.
It all seems to have been sorted to get the most money out of people for the casinos – and that means more for the government in extra tax (although if the companies register in a tax haven, will they still be as happy).

One line did make me laugh though, albeit more for the fact it was so hyocritical than any humour "the Government was not in the business to tell people how to spend their money or what to do with their time"
Comment by tony — 1 Nov 2004 on 7:34 pm | Link
That’h right
Comment by ILKA — 25 Apr 2006 on 1:16 am | Link
There’s a new site called http://www.gamblingdebate.com for people who are interested in the online gambling bill in the government right now. There’s a few informational pages about the bill, a forum where you can chat about the issue and a poll about what side of the debate you’re on.
Comment by Sasha — 30 Apr 2006 on 1:20 pm | Link

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says.

» Monday, November 1, 2004

Gambling

3 Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries