Clause 10 — Control when no exclusive licence

Horserace Betting and Olympic Lottery Bill – in the House of Commons at 5:45 pm on 2 February 2004.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Richard Caborn Richard Caborn Minister of State (Sport and Tourism), Department for Culture, Media & Sport 5:45, 2 February 2004

I beg to move amendment No. 19, in page 9, line 2, at end insert—

'(3) Sections 281 and 282 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (c. 44) (increases in maximum terms of imprisonment) shall apply to the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act 1963 (c. 2) as amended by this section.'.

Photo of Alan Haselhurst Alan Haselhurst Deputy Speaker and Chairman of Ways and Means

With this it will be convenient to discuss Government amendments Nos. 14 to 18.

Photo of Richard Caborn Richard Caborn Minister of State (Sport and Tourism), Department for Culture, Media & Sport

Amendment No. 19 is a small technical amendment. It will ensure that the provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 will apply to the offences inserted in the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act 1963 by the Bill in respect of unlawful pool betting and the submission of accounts for Gaming Board scrutiny. Amendments Nos. 14 and 15 deal with the period within which pool operators will be obliged to submit their accounts.

Once the exclusive licence comes to an end, anyone with a bookmaker's permit will be able to carry on pool betting business, subject to some requirements, the most significant of which is compliance with the regulatory regime set out in schedule 1, which will become schedule 1A to the 1963 Act.

Under part 3 of schedule 1A bookmakers will be required to submit monthly pool betting accounts to a supervising accountant, and this requirement must be complied with within seven days of the end of the month to which the accounts relate.

Mr. Paice tabled an amendment in Committee to extend that period from seven to 28 days, and I agreed to consider it, but I awaited further evidence from the Tote to support its concerns that seven days was not sufficient.

After the point was raised in Committee, the Tote explained why it would be difficult for it to comply with the provisions as drafted. I am therefore satisfied that it is appropriate to extend the period to 28 days, which is achieved by amendments Nos. 14 and 15.

Photo of Richard Caborn Richard Caborn Minister of State (Sport and Tourism), Department for Culture, Media & Sport

I turn to amendments Nos. 16, 17 and 18. On Second Reading I announced the extension of the levy until 2006. I am pleased that that was well received by hon. Members on both sides of the House, and I believe that it brought certainty to the industry. We fully expect that the Tote will have been sold by that date, so consequential amendments need to be made to existing legislation in respect of the Tote's role in the levy negotiations. We see no place for the privately owned successor company on the levy board, so amendment No. 16 removes the seat on the board held by the current Tote chairman, who will not be replaced on the board.

However, so long as the successor company is being run in the interests of racing, pursuant to the exclusive licence, we see benefit in allowing it to retain the Tote's ability to negotiate the levy separately from other bookmakers, because that will give it an effective way to make its contribution to racing. Should the levy system outlive the exclusive licence, the provisions make it clear that the successor company will be assessed for levy in the same way as any other bookmaker.

I hope that hon. Members find the amendments acceptable.

Photo of James Paice James Paice Shadow Secretary of State (Home Office)

I welcome amendments Nos. 14 and 15, and thank the Minister for reconsidering the amendments that we tabled in Committee and recognising the validity of our case by changing the period for the submission of accounts from seven days to 28 days.

As the Minister said, amendment No. 19 is technical.

On amendment No. 16, the Minister referred to the removal of the Tote chairman from the levy board. I understand his reasoning, but when will that actually happen? We are in a state of flux. We do not know precisely when the Tote will be sold, although we hope that it might be soon. We know that the levy board will be wound up in 2006, subject to the next group of amendments. However, it is not clear when the amendment will take effect. Will the Tote chairman remain on the levy board until such time as the Tote is sold? The amendment does not specify a date, but implies that he will be removed as soon as the Act comes into force, which might predate the sale of the Tote. Subject to that clarification, I am happy with the amendments.

Photo of Richard Caborn Richard Caborn Minister of State (Sport and Tourism), Department for Culture, Media & Sport

The provision will become operational when the Tote is sold. I understand from the lawyers that that is about fairness. When the Tote goes into the marketplace, the chairman forgoes his right to be on the levy board.

Amendment agreed to.