Gaming (Amendment) Bill [Lords] (Hansard, 27 March 1987)

§ Mr. Mark Carlisle (Warrington, South)
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.
I should like to explain briefly the purpose and effect of the Bill. It has a respectable parentage in that it puts into effect a recommendation of the Royal Commission on gambling, which was chaired by Lord Rothschild. It also had a considerable period of gestation, since the Royal Commission reported as long ago as July 1978. Therefore, there has been a gestation period of nine years, rather than the more usual nine months.
The Bill amends section 18 of the Gaming Act 1968, which is the parent Act, and relates to the control of gaming. Section 18 deals with the hours of gaming in permitted casinos and clubs on a Sunday. At present on weekdays gaming may take place between 2 pm and 4 am, but on Saturday night to Sunday the hours are different. In London they are from 2 pm on Saturday until 3 am on Sunday, which is an hour less than on weekdays, and in the rest of the country it is from 2 pm until 2 am, which is two hours less. Ironically, Saturday night is the most popular night, and the Royal Commission drew attention to that illogicality. It stated: We find it rather illogical that casinos should have to close one or two hours earlier on Saturday night/Sunday morning (which is perhaps the most popular night of the week for gaming) than on other nights, we therefore recommend that the closing time for casinos should be 4 am. on each night of the week and in all parts of the country. The Bill makes casino hours on Sunday the same as for the rest of the week in London and the rest of the country.
That recommendation not only comes from the Royal Commission but has the support of the Gaming Board. We discussed the matter with the board, which is satisfied that there is an unstimulated demand for the Bill. The Bill was introduced in the House of Lords by Lord Harris of Greenwich and received the support of both Front Benches. The Opposition spokesman was Baroness Ewart-Biggs who pointed out that the Bill was needed by the casinos and would be welcomed by those who use them.
Casinos are a substantial foreign currency earner. About 115 licensed casinos under the control of the Gaming Board raise about £150 million in foreign currency a year.
I commend the Bill to the House. It received support from both sides in the House of Lords, is approved by the Gaming Board and implements the recommendation of the Royal Commission.

§ Mr. Ivan Lawrence (Burton)
As I represent Burton on Trent, which is fast becoming the slot-machine manufacturing centre of Britain, I support the Bill. It is patent to everybody that any sensible flexibility which meets with the approval of all interested parties will be good for Britain and tourism.

§ Mr. Alfred Dubs (Battersea)
The casino economy.

§ Mr. Lawrence
Labour Members may laugh at the casino economy. We do not have a casino economy, but we have a thriving, prosperous economy which has been underlined by the remarkable success and achievement of the Budget. [Interruption.] It is remarkable that every 716 success for Britain becomes a failure for the Labour party. There is no doubt that, when a Chancellor can reduce taxes and public borrowing, and increase public spending on education and health by nearly £5 billion, it is a great achievement. This is not, of course, a casino economy. The hon. Member for Holborn and St. Pancras (Mr. Dobson) and for Battersea (Mr. Dubs) speak with their tongues in their cheeks.
The object of the exercise is to increase employment, and all hon. Members would want to do that. There is no greater immediate scope for the increase of employment than the improvement of tourism. That requires flexibility and good sense in our gaming laws. It also requires flexibility and good sense in our licensing laws. I am anxious that we should get on to the next business. I hope that we shall be able to advance the flexibility and good sense of the Government's licensing policy and that it will reach the statute book.
Of course, jobs depend upon tourism. It is not only the employment of croupiers and people who work in casinos that are attractive to foreign tourists, but a considerable number of people in Burton on Trent owe their jobs to the expansion of that part of the casino industry that relies upon gaming machines.
We must compliment all those who are concerned with the introduction of this Bill, both in the House of Commons and the House of Lords. I give considerable credit and thanks to my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Warrington, South (Mr. Carlisle) who introduced the Bill. I am sure that, notwithstanding the ribaldry of Opposition Members, it will gain the support of all hon. Members.

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Douglas Hogg)
My right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Warrington, South (M r. Carlisle) has explained the purpose of and justification for the Bill. It remains for me to do just two things. First, the Government support the Bill. wish it well and hope that it receives its Third Reading. Secondly, I congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on the clear and lucid way in which he described what is inevitably a rather complicated aspect of the law.

§ Mr. Mark Carlisle
The Bill in no way affects the powers of licensing justices to control a casino. It provides only for maximum permitted hours.

§ Mr. Hogg
My right hon. and learned Friend is wholly right. I am glad that he raised that point.
I congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on the tactical skill that he and Lord Harris of Greenwich have shown in securing the passage of the Bill through the two Houses.

§ Mr. Frank Dobson (Holborn and St. Pancras)
On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Who is responsible for the accuracy of the Annunciator? My hon. Friend the Member for Battersea (Mr. Dubs) dashed into the Chamber because, as I understand it, when I was speaking on the Community Health Councils (Access to Information) Bill, the Annunciator announced that Mr. 717 Dubs was speaking. Despite the close physical resemblance between us, and also the exceedingly crowded Chamber today, which would explain any confusion, we would like an end put to this error. It has happened several times.

§ Mr. Alfred Dubs (Battersea)
Further to that point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker I have sympathy with the people who work the Annunciators. My hon. Friend and I are often mistaken for each other. He is called Alf and I am called Frank! I understand the reason for the confusion. Nevertheless, it would help if the matter could be sorted out, notwithstanding, as my hon. Friend said, the resemblance between our appearances.

§ Mr. Lawrence
Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I am often mistaken for my hon. Friend the Member for Orpington (Mr. Stanbrook), although he is much more attractive than I am. At an engagement the other evening, I was mistaken for my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Southport (Sir I. Percival). I understand why those who operate the machinery can be confused.
I draw your attention, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to another problem. When I looked at the Annunciator, I saw that the Bill of my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Warrington, South (Mr. Carlisle) was being discussed in Committee. I hurtled into the Chamber and began to prepare my address to a crowded House for Third Reading, only to find that we were nearing the end of the Third Reading debate. If my Third Reading speech bore any marks of inadequate preparation, it was due to the fact that I was not sufficiently alerted by the Annunciator to the fact that the debate on Third Reading had already begun and that the Committee stage was over.

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Ernest Armstrong)
I understand the hon. and learned Gentleman's point of order. The Committee stage was dealt with very efficiently and quickly. I sympathise with those who run the Annunciator system. I am often confused when I look round the Chamber and have to call hon. Members to speak. However, I shall certainly have the matter looked into.