Parliament will not agree to “anything higher than £2”

Parliament will not agree to “anything higher than £2” says Sir Peter Bottomley who is prepared to put down a motion allowing a final vote on the future of the maximum stake on FOBTs.

 

Sir Peter Bottomley will lead a parliamentary guard against any government proposal for an FOBT maximum stake higher than £2, with the veteran MP prepared to put down a motion in the Commons allowing members of all parties to vote together on the final outcome.

Announcing his intentions just hours after the Gambling Commission released its recommendations to the DCMS, Bottomley believes whatever Matt Hancock decides for FOBT maximum stakes, Parliament will not allow anything through over £2.

“Parliament, I’m certain, will be able to have a clear vote on whether it’s £2 or anything else the government may propose, “he explained. “If the government proposed £2 all-round they’ll get that through easily, if they propose anything higher than £2, I think they’ll be a vote on £2, and I expect £2 to be the result.”

Bottomley also shared his thoughts on the Gambling Commission’s advice and spared little sympathy for bookmakers or the Treasury, both of which have enjoyed undeserved and unintended income from Cat B2 machines for far too long.

“The Gambling Commission ought to have recommended coming down to £2 years ago, I’m glad they have now for slots, I can’t understand why they can’t make the same recommendation for the roulette machines. I don’t think they have the confidence to go the whole way, I hope that parliament will have the opportunity of saying £2 and no more,” he commented. “If this leads to the end of B2s in betting shops – fine, they don’t exist in Ireland in betting shops, and I don’t think we need the disadvantage of having them here.

Whether the Treasury suffers a loss it doesn’t matter to me, if the Treasury can show when the Gaming Act came in that they actually budgeted to take all this money, I’d be surprised.”

Indeed for Bottomley and the large number of fellow MPs that agree with him, the fight to cut FOBT maximum stakes to £2 is a social one. They simply want to “avoid people losing a fortune”, and if that means “less money for the bookmaking chains and the treasury, it’s the obvious consequence”. He said this should have happened much sooner, and that “the Gambling Commission should have made a report shortly after the 2005 act,” when it became obvious the the bookmakers would install the machines in their thousands.

“That wasn’t anticipated, the Gambling Commission should have woken up earlier,” he concluded. “I’m glad they’ve now got most of the message, it’s now up to parliament to present the rest of it. They aren’t the only one to blame, the worst ones are the betting shop operators who knew that their gravy train was undeserved, unintended and would be time limited. They’ve defended it in all kinds of ways that not everyone would regard as scrupulous.”

Related Posts