Clause 149 - Interested party
Gambling Bill
3:30 pm
Mr Richard Caborn (Minister of State (Sport and Tourism), Department for Culture, Media & Sport; Sheffield Central, Labour)
As the hon. Gentleman says, there is an admirable intention behind the amendments. However, one of the three licensing objectives is to ensure that children and young people are protected from being harmed or exploited by gambling, and so I do not believe that the amendments are necessary.
To take amendment No. 331 first, clause 327 already requires a local authority to consult those who should be consulted about the licensing policy statement. Subsection 3(d) requires an authority to consult any persons
''who are likely to be affected by the exercise of the authority's functions''
or their representatives. I have every confidence that authorities will consult persons who have an interest in the social well-being of the wider community. It is left open in the Bill who the authorities will be required to consult, so that each authority can consult those persons most likely to be able to make a contribution to the licensing policy.Subsection (3)(d) is not limited to persons in the licensing authority area.
On amendment No. 330, the licensing policy would be applied every time that an authority considered an application. Therefore, where appropriate, persons with responsibility for addressing social well-being will already have been given a chance to express their views. Clause 149 also allows any person who is sufficiently close to the premises and who is likely to be affected by them to make representations. It will be down to local authorities to determine what ''sufficiently close'' means. We think that that will give adequate protection where it is needed.