HL Deb 23 February 1995 vol 561 cc1272-4

4.51 p.m.

Baroness Blotch rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 23rd January be approved [7th Report from the Joint Committee]

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, the order provides for the relaxation of certain of the controls on the facilities and amenities permitted in licensed betting offices under the powers contained in Section 1 of the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries (Amendment) Act 1984. The order represents the first change to betting office facilities made in some 10 years since the powers were introduced although they were used in 1986 to expand the text which could be used on shop fronts. Associated changes in the controls on window displays will be made by means of new regulations to be made shortly. The order has been approved in another place.

The main changes which the order seeks to make concern the abolition of the controls on televisions and a limited extension of the range of light refreshments available in betting shops. They have been the subject of extensive public consultation.

The order repeals the current controls which limit the size of television screens in betting offices to 30 inches and which prevent televisions being positioned where they are visible from outside the premises. Ten years ago television screens were new to betting offices, and the rules introduced at that time on their size and usage were conservative since no one was sure of the likely impact of their introduction. A decade later the controls seem unnecessarily restrictive, given the wide-ranging changes in the availability of television, video and cable in the home. Nowadays, it is impossible to envisage a betting office without television coverage of all forms of racing.

In reviewing the controls, we decided that it was preferable to abolish the size restriction completely and allow the betting industry the freedom to adopt the dimensions of television screens which were suitable for the size and location of premises.

The changes also remove the requirement that televisions are not visible from the street. Most people nowadays have reasonable access to television and many decide to video sporting events when they are not able to see them. We decided that it was preferable to do away with this unnecessary restriction completely, thereby putting betting offices on a par with other high street premises such as television rental shops. Our view is that these changes can be made without substantially eroding the principle that betting offices should provide reasonable facilities for punters in the course of their betting activities and should not be regarded as places of general entertainment.

The controls also provide for an extension of the very limited range of refreshments which betting offices can currently supply. Ten years ago the view was taken that punters should only be able to have a narrow range of snacks such as crisps and biscuits. We now consider that the range of light refreshments should be extended to include items such as prepackaged sandwiches and prepackaged snacks. Such refreshments should not, however, constitute a full restaurant meal. It is also an important principle that such refreshments have to be sold and cannot be offered as free inducements to customers to go into premises and bet. I reassure your Lordships that we have no intention of changing the controls on licensing which prevent betting offices selling alcoholic beverages or being used as places where alcoholic drinks can be consumed.

The changes represent modest deregulation for the betting industry without undermining the social basis of the controls. They will benefit consumers by providing them with a more pleasant environment in which to place their bets and will remove the straitjacket of somewhat petty and unnecessary controls for the industry. I commend the order to your Lordships. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 23rd January be approved [7th Report from the Joint Committee]. —(Baroness Blatch.)

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

My Lords, I suppose I have a perverse qualification in that I was trying to remember whether or not I had ever been inside a betting shop and I do not believe I have. However, having had this whole matter brought to my attention and realising the restrictions that exist in regard to what can happen in betting shops, it seems to me that the whole situation is ludicrous.

It is ludicrous that the restrictions should exist in the first place. The modest changes proposed in the order, although we shall not oppose them, seem to me to go only a short distance. It is impossible to imagine why we maintain the restrictions at all. Of course it is right not to restrict the size of a television set nor indeed the angle at which it stands and from where it should be viewed. I am reminded of what Ernest Hemingway said to Scott Fitzgerald, which perhaps I should not quote in your Lordships' House on that subject. He was not referring to television sets!

As to the restrictions on snacks and meals, the change in the order seems minimal. Why should not there be restaurant meals served in a betting shop provided that the hygiene regulations required of restaurant kitchens are applied to betting shops as well? In other words, why should not people who want to bet—I do not want to bet but I have nothing against those who do—enjoy themselves in a pleasant atmosphere? I do not oppose the regulations but I hope that at some stage we will come to our senses and not stick these puritanical restrictions on people who want to amuse themselves in a relatively innocent way.

On Question, Motion agreed to.