Experts have raised concerns regarding the UK government’s recent decision to repeal the ‘aim to permit’ licensing rule for gambling venues, suggesting that this action may necessitate new legislation to amend the Gambling Act of 2005, potentially leading to additional reforms.
The ‘aim to permit’ rule serves as a guideline for local councils, allowing them to approve licenses for gambling venues as long as these establishments comply with the Gambling Commission's policies, guidance, and licensing objectives.
This announcement was made by Prime Minister Andy Burnham on August 11, as part of an initiative aimed at increasing local authority control over high street businesses. Included in these changes, Adult Gaming Centres will now be required to seek planning permission.
Burnham grouped betting shops with vape shops, describing them as “dodgy businesses,” a characterization that has drawn backlash from the industries involved.
Complicated Legislation Ahead
The removal of the ‘aim to permit’ rule is unlikely to be a simple task, as it is a core element of the 2005 Gambling Act. Andrew Lyman, Gibraltar’s Gambling Commissioner and former director at the UK Gambling Commission, noted, “A fundamental change to an underlying principle of the act (one might say the fundamental principle) would need to be changed by primary legislation.”
Lyman indicated that the government might attempt to circumvent this issue through planning changes, but acknowledged that doing so could introduce legal complications and potentially lead to judicial reviews. Louisa Clark, an independent licensing and compliance consultant and ex-compliance manager for the Gambling Commission, echoed this sentiment, stating that amending the Gambling Act through primary legislation seems unavoidable.
Clark clarified, “Aim to permit is written directly into the Gambling Act itself. It can’t be overturned by making a ministerial announcement, changing local policy or Gambling Commission guidance.” She highlighted that the specifics regarding these legislative changes—whether they entail an overhaul of the Gambling Act, a new act, or a specific bill addressing the repeal of the ‘aim to permit’—remain uncertain until the upcoming consultation concludes.
Challenges Ahead
For the gambling industry, any legislative changes to the Gambling Act may risk exacerbating existing tensions, especially given the current negative governmental stance on gambling. Following the announcement on ‘aim to permit’, the Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH), representing public health directors throughout the UK, called for a new Gambling Act grounded in ‘public health principles’. In a statement on LinkedIn, the ADPH asserted that this governmental step “must be matched by national action, including introducing a gambling advertising, promotion and sponsorship ban.”
Lyman emphasized that the potential for further advocacy from campaigners and political figures might broaden the reform discussion to other sectors. He warned, “Any change to primary legislation will result in a wider debate about government risk appetite and the general approach to gambling. Those calling for a new Gambling Act will agitate for that, and what has been billed as a six-week consultation… will morph into a much longer policy process around changes to the Gambling Act and the role of the Gambling Commission.” He added, “It’s possible that the idea of giving power back to local communities may open Pandora’s box leading to a long and tortuous road to a new Gambling Act.”
Uncertain Future
The outcome of this legislative change is not predetermined. The Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government will conduct a fast-track consultation regarding the change, with a reported goal of implementation by January 2027. Yet, industry experts have pointed out that this timeline might be overly ambitious, particularly if primary legislation is indeed required. The existing Gambling Act took several years to develop and implement, signaling that if significant changes are forthcoming, there could be a lengthy delay before concrete results are seen, during which the political climate may shift.
Experts argue that the announcement appears to have preceded in-depth consideration of how the repeal of ‘aim to permit’ will be practically executed. Clark remarked, “There’s going to be a consultation and that’s going to be the opportunity where we all talk about the implications of this. I think it’s more a political ambition at this point in time.” She also mentioned that while campaigners will likely seek broader discussions, it’s too early to predict the extent of any reforms.
Clark stated, “It’s definitely a possibility and an opportunity that they’re going to be exploring. There’s going to be lobbying; reformers will seek to expand this debate beyond just removing the ‘aim to permit’.”
Not Necessarily a New Act
However, she cautioned against assuming that a new act is the inevitable result of these developments. “I just want to be really cautious about predicting the scope until we’ve seen the consultation, until we’ve seen a draft bill. We need to not confuse political rhetoric with what’s been settled legislatively because we just don’t know.”
Still, amidst the evolving dynamics in the UK retail sector, the potential for further restrictions adds a layer of anxiety for executives in the gambling industry. A particularly concerning proposition is that existing premises licenses could come under scrutiny, not only new licenses. Lyman strongly condemned this notion, stating, “The idea that powers should be given to licensing authorities to revoke existing licenses for no good reason other than a moral and social standpoint on gambling is tantamount to anti-gambling zealotry, presents issues for the rule of law and demonstrates exactly why local council officials or members should not be given such powers.
