Experts are cautioning that the UK government's recent repeal of the 'aim to permit' licensing rule for gambling premises might necessitate new legislation to amend the 2005 Gambling Act, raising the possibility of further reforms.
The 'aim to permit' rule directs councils to approve gambling premises licenses if they comply with Gambling Commission policy, guidance, and licensing objectives. Prime Minister Andy Burnham announced this change on August 11, 2023, as part of a broader initiative to enhance local control over high streets. Moreover, Adult Gaming Centres, which provide 24-hour gaming machine access, will now need planning permission under these new plans.
While announcing these changes, Burnham also imposed fresh restrictions on vape shops, characterizing both them and betting shops as “dodgy businesses,” a portrayal that has met with backlash from the industry.
Experts warn that eliminating the 'aim to permit' directive from local council licensing procedures will not be a straightforward task, given that it is a core component of the 2005 Gambling Act. Andrew Lyman, Gibraltar’s Gambling Commissioner and a former director at the UK Gambling Commission, stated, “A fundamental change to an underlying principle of the act (one might say the fundamental principle) would need to be changed by primary legislation.” He noted that the government might find ways to navigate this challenge through planning changes, though this would likely lead to legal disputes and possibly a judicial review.
Louisa Clark, an independent compliance consultant and former Gambling Commission compliance manager, also emphasized the necessity of amending the Gambling Act through primary legislation. “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 asserted. The specifics of how this amendment would unfold—whether it will involve overhauling the current Act, drafting a new one, or simply a bill focused on withdrawing the 'aim to permit' rule—remain to be clarified in an upcoming consultation.
The potential legislative alterations to the Gambling Act could pose challenges for the industry, especially as government perspectives on gambling appear increasingly negative. Following the announcement regarding the 'aim to permit' repeal, the Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH), representing public health directors across the UK, has advocated for a new Gambling Act rooted in public health principles. In a LinkedIn statement, ADPH emphasized that the government’s move “must be matched by national action, including introducing a gambling advertising, promotion and sponsorship ban.”
Lyman indicated that further pressures from campaigners and politicians to broaden the discussion on gambling reform are likely. He stated, “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.
“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.”
As for the future ramifications of the repeal, the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government will spearhead a fast-tracked consultation, with hopes to implement changes by January 2027. However, industry observers have labeled this timeline as ambitious given that primary legislation will likely be necessary. The existing Gambling Act took several years from inception to implementation, so if a new or substantially altered act is forthcoming, it could be a while before anything definitive manifests, potentially signaling shifts in priorities over time.
Experts believe the announcement may have been made without thorough consideration of its practical implications. According to Clark, “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 pointed out that it remains uncertain how these developments will unfold, yet there are opportunities for campaigners to push their agendas. “It’s definitely a possibility and an opportunity that they’re going to be exploring. There’s going to be lobbying, and there are going to be reformers who are going to seek to broaden this debate and make a much wider change than just removing 'aim to permit,'” she explained.
Despite these concerns, Clark remarked, “But we don’t need to assume a new act is the inevitable consequence of what’s going on now. I just want to be really cautious about predicting the scope until we’ve seen the consultation and a draft bill.”
She stressed the importance of distinguishing between political rhetoric and settled legislation, noting that the future remains uncertain. With the retail sector bracing for potentially negative developments, the possibility of imposing further restrictions looms large, with some reform advocates suggesting existing premises licenses could also come under scrutiny.
Lyman cautioned that such measures would create significant issues. He remarked, “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.
