The usual Conservative suspects entered the race to be the bookmakers’ favourite MP in the recent Opposition Debate on giving more power to local authorities to control Fixed Odds Betting Terminals (FOBTs), but a strong run by Labour MP Gerry Sutcliffe left them all standing.
Mr Sutcliffe, who declared his interest in representing the racecourse bookmakers pitch association, wore a variety of colours in running. He spoke as an MP, but referred to his roles as a past Minister responsible at DCMS and as a trustee of the Responsible Gambling Trust (RGT).
In 2008, Mr Sutcliffe advocated looking at FOBTs whilst at the same time trying to resolve the Horseracing Levy issue. The Levy was resolved, but no FOBT specific review has
everbeen undertaken. By 2009, Mr Sutcliffe had already agreed to a review of all high-stakes, high-prize Category B machines, diluting the effect of a B2-only FOBT review.
The disastrous consequence is obvious in the recently published Nat Cen research entitled "
Examining player behaviour: a qualitative exploration". This research studied machine gamblers in situ in arcades and bingo halls, but it did not study in situ FOBT gamblers, because the bookmakers would not allow researchers access to betting shops.
The RGT, the body that this research was delivered to, has not offered any explanation as to why a trust primarily funded by bookmakers, with a bookmaking chair and bookmaking trustees, was unable to persuade bookmakers to enable vital qualitative FOBT research by the Nat Cen researchers, whom the government are relying on to inform them about FOBTs.
Mr Sutcliffe condemned the
Campaign for Fairer Gamblingin Parliament for raising concerns around the RGT research. But in the context of the refusal of access to FOBTs, how can it not be a cause for concern? Just as there may be some good people on the boards of bookmakers there may be some good people on the RGT, but the presence of good people is never a guarantee of good outcomes.
Mr Sutcliffe also questioned in Parliament why the
Campaigndoes not focus on other gambling issues. Put simply, Government has the power to do something today about FOBTs - without primary legislation - by reducing the maximum stake from £100 to £2 per spin. So FOBTs - the most significant gambling issue - is the easiest to immediately resolve.
Mr Sutcliffe must be unaware that FOBTs are now the high street equivalent of 23 very-super-casinos. FOBT losses from gamblers, on a per machine basis, are on parity with the losses from slot machine gamblers in the top 23 Las Vegas Strip casinos (which are open 24 hours a day, exclude under-age 21 gamblers, allow alcohol consumption at machines and cater to gamblers who can afford to travel to and stay in the casino hotels).
In Parliament, Mr Sutcliffe must have had a memory lapse when he said that Neil Goulden, Chair of the RGT, was not also Chair of the ABB, because that very same day Mr Goulden
was on Channel 4 news defending the bookmakers in his role as Chair of the ABB, in this illuminating interview!
Mr Goulden has stated he will step down from the ABB but he is still “acting Chair” until the position is filled. Maybe this is an opportunity for a retired politician to represent bookmakers in an official capacity?
By Derek Webb - Founder, Campaign for Fairer Gambling and Stop the FOBTs