David Lucas is well qualified to talk about licensed gambling premises. He is a Vice-Chair of the Institute of Licensing, a solicitor by profession, a member of the Gambling Business Group and a highly respected consultant on gambling and alcohol licensing. He would have welcomed the opportunity to have prior discussions with the Government when it came to the latest amendment to licensing going through the parliamentary process currently – the Gambling Impact Assessments. Here, he talks to Coinslot about the GIA’s, the predicament facing licensing officials and the Gambling Conference he’s hosting at the IoL gathering upstairs from the ARE Exhibition in Manchester next week. David Lucas has some observations for those running local and national licensing decisions – and of course, he has some practical solutions – the most important being “talk to us”.
You couldn’t meet a nicer, more amicable man, but boy can David Lucas deliver a sucker punch in the most measured but highly constructive way. And he didn’t hold back when talking to Coinslot this past week on the issue of the Gambling Impact Assessments, and the entire framework that is pushing the fragile licensing process towards a massive pressure point.
It was a conversation between two polar extremes – Lucas, controlled, thoughtful and problem solving in his outlook, and Coinslot, rampant raging hostility to any over regulation and bad legislation.
And yet, both were on the same page.
“There is a high degree of regulation impacting both businesses that have to adhere to them and the licensing officials that have to apply them,” he told Coinslot. “And the Gambling Impact Assessments will add to the burden that is going to weigh people down on both sides.”
It was a sober perspective.
“It’s disheartening that there was no formal consultation on the GIAs, and in their current form they appear to create more problems than they set out to achieve.”
One of those problems is few know what they are meant to achieve, other than increasing red tape, curbing growth on the high street and, most worryingly, pushing local authorities into the courts when operators appeal any application rejections.
A harsh prediction from Coinslot, perhaps, but stepping back for a moment, most stakeholders know exactly what the driving force behind the Gambling Impact Assessments is: backbench gambling prohibitionist MPs muscling in to keep betting, AGCs and bingo clubs off the high street. And a DCMS pandering to the parliamentary lobbying group and inadvertently pushing morality into the licensing arena.
Listening to this generalisation, Lucas was quick to add some important context. “When it comes to licensing, there is no room for morality in the decision making process. Gambling legislation is very clearly set out; unless there is relevant evidence to refuse an application, then our task currently is to aim to permit.”
But that is all possibly going to change – Gambling Impact Assessments are being proposed as a means to eradicate the Aim to Permit principle. Would that be fair to say?
“It’s a fairly accurate assessment of the direction the licensing process could possibly take,” Lucas noted. “But, and this is the disappointment, if there was at least a formal consultation, we would have been able to explain how GIAs are flawed from the very principle to their practical implementation. The lessons of the Cumulative Impact Assessments in the Licensing Act have shown this to be the case. Fewer councils are leaning on CIAs in the licensing process because they are potentially more problematic than problem solving.”
And why is that? Well, you probably need to ask the local authorities that have pulled away from CIAs – according to Home Office statistics they have fallen since the Act was introduced and number in the low hundreds.
So what lessons can we learn from this? Lucas offered a very important suggestion: “One of the more obvious reasons is they run contrary to the overriding aim of councils to regenerate the high street. The CIAs tended to focus more on restrictions and have caused significant problems in the licensing arena. It’s very difficult to raise the obstacles and expect the high street to develop and thrive.”
And therein may lie the key lesson for GIAs and the amusements, gaming and gambling industry.
Lucas was candid. “It appears GIAs will have a very similar impact and, quite honestly, it contradicts all the experience that we have when it comes to gambling premises. The truth of the matter is gambling isn’t one of the problem areas for licensing authorities. Gambling premises do not usually give rise to complaints – and it’s a reality that some legislators could certainly benefit from as they draft the legislation amendments.”
And that’s saying something given the huge scope that the IoL members oversee. From your pubs and restaurants to off-licences, taxi ranks, sex shops – a large extent of businesses on the UK high street are administered by the licensing officers.
And gambling doesn’t even register on the problem list. Take a moment: of all the high street businesses, gambling is one sector that doesn’t tend to generate issues at the council offices.
That doesn’t align with the public’s perception.
Lucas was very conscious of this anomaly. “It’s so disappointing that there were no discussions with the IoL on Gambling Impact Assessments before the proposed amendment was introduced. From what we’ve seen, we are trying to interpret what is being imposed and how GIAs will impact on licensing authorities. From a licensing officer’s perspective, it is difficult to see how they will work in practice. There is a lack of real evidence to evaluate gambling impact on a local premises level. In individual boroughs, it will be difficult, almost impossible for councillors to set the parameters.”
But the train has left the station; and the industry has sought counsel’s advice, which is not looking good for the legislators.
“My biggest worry is how this will impact the local authorities. I sense this could lead to an increase in contested hearings and appeals, other legal challenges and possibly one major combined action. Stakeholders are vocalising their concerns over the GIAs and the government does need to listen. It won’t be the Lords or MPs debating the amendment who will be conducting hearings or responding to legal challenges. At the moment, local authorities may lose five figure sums on appeals and that it is damaging to the funds of councils who are already under financial strain. This will not help that situation.”
And that is one of the practical issues Lucas is particularly focused on. “Councils are cutting back on staff numbers due to budget constraints – and sadly, licensing officers are not immune from that process. GIAs will add an extra, and extensive, layer to the licensing process and this will take its toll.”
From the micro to the macro, Lucas is acutely aware of the broader obligations of local authorities. Reducing regulation, facilitating growth and building the high street economy are the fundamental tenets of the licensing process. But will the GIAs enhance that return?
Lucas answered simply – “no”.
Would you like to add something else to that!
“It’s an important message to understand. When the IoL, local business associations and all the national trade bodies have a consensus view – one should listen. And more importantly, when the forerunner of GIAs, the Cumulative Impact Assessments, are losing popularity, talking to us will be beneficial. Imposing Gambling Impact Assessments into the licensing process, and the requirement to provide credible and robust evidence to back them up is not a licensing framework people can work with easily, if at all.”
So it’s no surprise then that the GIA issue will probably play a vital role in the upcoming Gambling Conference at the IoL assembly in Manchester next week.
Lucas went into detail: “As well as running two panels for operators and regulators, we’ll be discussing the bingo changes, the consistency of decision making arising from the Sheffield AGC appeal, the declining numbers of betting shops, the lack of evidence relating to gambling premises operations, gambling policies…and of course, GIAs. I think it will be informative and valuable to our legislators and regulators.”
From there, Lucas will head down to the ARE Expo and the Gambling Business Group’s High Street Hub, joining a number of licensing and police officials as they tour the show and explore the innovations that are driving player protections in the industry.
It’s a full-on two days for the licensing maestro – and a full-on head-to-head with Coinslot once again as he joins the panel on the regeneration of the UK’s high streets on the second day of ARE , which will be chaired by Coinslot owner Chris Jones.
Now that’s a very unfortunate end to a successful two days!
A unworkable formula?
David Lucas said…. “Imposing Gambling Impact Assessments into the licensing process, and the requirement to provide credible and robust evidence to back them up is not a licensing framework people can work with easily, if at all……
GIAs … united in Manchester
David Lucas said……. “It’s an important message to understand. When the IoL, local business associations and all the national trade bodies have a consensus view – one should listen. And more importantly, when the forerunner of GIAs, the Cumulative Impact Assessments, are losing popularity, talking to us will be beneficial……
