Principles to be applied
Gambling Bill
Public Bill Committees, 2 December 2004, 3:00 pm

Mr Don Foster (Shadow Secretary of State for Culture, Media & Sport, Culture, Media & Sport; Bath, Liberal Democrat)
I beg to move amendment No. 359, in clause 145, page 64, line 38, leave out 'not'.
Lest the Minister draws my attention to clause 68 and the fact that we have already agreed to it and its making clear that a demand test is not required, I point out that that clause relates to the granting of an operating licence by the commission, and that in this clause we are discussing the granting of a premises licence by a licensing authority, namely a local authority. I remind the Minister that I am still waiting to receive a letter from him explaining the absence of unitary authorities in the list of those councils that are meant to be licensing authorities. He will recall that we are still trying to find out whether Bath and North East Somerset is a unitary authority or whether it will have to call itself something like a county without districts, bearing in mind there is no such county. I hope that I get an assurance from him to return to that matter.
The amendment relates to the issuing of premises licence by a licensing authority. We will shortly debate clause 157, which gives local authorities clear powers to say no to any casinos whatsoever for three years. That is a welcome power for local authorities.
The Minister will be aware, however, that some local authorities will not want to have to invoke clause 157, or a complete ban on all casinos, but will want an opportunity to consider, case by case, individual proposals for planning and premises licences. In doing that, they need to maximise their power to refuse the application. Many councils are aware that when they have considered casino and other planning applications in the past they have had had good reasons, as representatives of the local people, to deny the application, only to find their decision overturned on appeal to the planning inspectorate on behalf of the Secretary of State. They are therefore conscious that their powers are not as total as they would like.
Surely it is important to enable councils to have the maximum range of powers to assist them in deciding whether to reject an individual casino application for a premises licence. That is why it is important that we return to the demand test as one of the measures that authorities can reasonably expect to use during their deliberations on an application. The amendment, which would simply delete the word ''not'', would mean that local authorities could take into account evidence along the lines of a demand test.
