To review the statement of principles (Gambling Policy) to be applied by the council when exercising licensing functions under the Gambling Act 2005 (the Act).

The committee was invited to review the statement of principles (Gambling Policy) to be applied by the council when exercising licensing functions under the Gambling Act 2005 (the Act).

The Acting Assistant Director for Regulatory Environment and Waste introduced the report.  He reported that the Gambling Act 2005 required the Council to have a statement of gambling licensing policy.  The revised policy, as appended, was largely unchanged.  However, amendments had been made to reflect the requirements of two new codes issued by the Gambling Commission: Licensing Conditions and Code of Practice (LCCP) and the Social Responsibility Code.

In discussion the following principal points were made (references in brackets are to the policy set out in the appendix to the report:

·        (para 1.1) The wording currently states ‘to promote gambling in accordance with the licensing objectives’.  Clarification was sought on whether this might more accurately reflect the council’s role to ‘enable’ gambling rather than promote it.   It was noted that the licensing authority is there to ‘’promote compliance’ and not to promote gambling.

·        (para 1.4) It was proposed that the word ‘used’ in line one should be replaced by ’inform’ to read: “The Licensing Authority is required to publish a Gambling Licensing Policy that will inform it when exercising its licensing functions.”.  Officers agreed to this proposed wording change.

·         A general point was raised about the number of technical and legal terms used in the report.  It was argued that the report would be strengthened and would aid the readers understanding if a glossary of terms were to be included. 

·        It was asked how Herefordshire’s response to the consultation on this policy compared to other local authority areas.  In response it was suggested that Herefordshire tended to have a low consultation response compared to larger authority settings, where more contentious licensing decisions were taken. 

·        (paragraph 5.5) This referred to determining an application for a premises licence without a hearing if the authority thought that the representations were vexatious or frivolous, or would not influence the determination of the application.  It was noted that this was terminology drawn directly from the legislation.  Its purpose was to allow officers to determine that any objections raised, for example, were not from a competitor businesses who may have financial interests in the outcome of the licensing decision.  There were strict criteria that officers would apply in determining whether objections were valid.

·        A further question concerned whether the policy included reference to transfers or variation of licenses.  Officers commented that transfers and variations were not stated clearly in the document; the functions in the Act provided for the determination of all applications including transfers and variations.  The purpose of the policy was to show how Herefordshire Council would carry out those functions locally.  The availability of information to applicants about making an application was raised. A general view emerged that it would be helpful to make this information more visible in the policy document.

·        (para 15.6)  In relation to operating a proof of age scheme for children and young persons, it was noted that there is nothing in the policy around ‘training in child protection’.  It was proposed that an additional category in the itemised list in para 15.6 be added around children’s safeguarding.

·        (see recommendation e below) Various changes to the wording in the policy document were suggested.  Reference was made to the foreword.  It was requested that in the second paragraph reference to ‘list of those consulted can be found at the rear’ should be amended to say ‘found in the appendix’.  A further point of clarification was requested in relation to the term ‘purpose of the principles’.  It was proposed that this should be amended to ‘purpose of the policy.  It was also suggested that reference to ‘gambling objectives’ be altered to ‘the objectives regulating gambling’.

·        Reference was made to the statement of principles where vulnerable children and other vulnerable persons were described.  It was advocated that this should be all children, not just vulnerable children.   It was also noted that the three licensing objectives were taken directly from statute – as a result it was difficult to deviate from this wording. A further reference was made to the term ’thriving and sustainable community’.  It was suggested that should be changed to ‘thriving and sustainable economy’. 

·        The policy noted that it would be published every three years.  It seemed more accurate to say that it would be reviewed every three years.  The policy also stated that it may be reviewed from ‘time to time’.  It was clarified that there were times when the policy would require review, if, for example, there were changes in legislation, to ensure it was compliant.

·        (Para4.5) Reference to governance team should be removed

·        (Para 5.2) This made reference to a deadline in connection to making representations, but did not clarify the timeframes attached to that deadline.

·        Section 18 of the policy covered review of premises licenses... It was noted that a review could be initiated as a result of representations being made, but questioned whether the review provisions should also extend to organisations who failed to uphold the core principles of the policy.  It was noted that officers worked with the Gambling Commission on enforcement if licensees were found to be in breach of their conditions of license.  This could lead to a review of a licence or in more serious cases, revocation.

·        Section 18 of the policy was silent on an organisation’s right of appeal against a decision by the licensing authority.

RESOLVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE EXECUTIVE THAT:

a)     officers review the wording in Para 1.1 of the policy to ensure it places clear  emphasis on promoting compliance with the principles set out in the Act, and make clear that it is not about promoting gambling;

b)     officers include a glossary of terms to cover all technical and legal terms set out in the report before it goes on to cabinet and full Council;

c)     a sentence be added to the policy document to highlight where people can be directed to apply for a licence;

d)     a new category (i) be added to the itemised list in para 15.6 of the policy to include training in child protection and child safeguarding;

e)     officers look at all of the suggested various changes to wording of the policy suggested in bullet point 7 above and update the policy to ensure there is clarity in the phraseology used;

f)      the various references to children and young persons should – for consistency – be changed to children and young people throughout the policy document;

g)     officers revise the wording to highlight that the gambling policy is ‘reviewed’ every three years and to add clarity to the reference of policy review from ‘time to time’ – with the additional context that this will happen when/if there are changes to legislation during the three year period;

h)     officers remove the reference to ‘the governance team’ in para 4.5 of the policy;

i)       officers state clearly what the deadline timeframes are in para 5.2 of the policy;

j)       grounds for a review of a premises license as set out at section 18 of the policy should also include any breaches to the principles that the licensing authority, upholds in overseeing the policy and any related enforcement action; and

k)     details on rights of appeal should be included in the policy document.