HL Deb 10 July 2002 vol 637 cc771-3

8.2 p.m.

Lord Davies of Oldham

rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 12th June be approved [32nd Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I am satisfied that this draft order is compatible with convention rights. The purpose of the order is to remove the restrictions on the form of refreshments, other than alcohol, which may be sold in licensed betting offices in Great Britain.

Currently, betting offices are only allowed to sell their customers pre-packaged food. In the vast majority of cases that means packets of crisps and chocolate bars. There is no good reason to retain this restriction. Indeed, on nutritional grounds there may be good reasons to abolish it.

If bookmakers have the facilities to provide a wider, better range of food products then surely they should be allowed to do so.

Following the report produced last year by Sir Alan Budd and his team in the independent Gambling Review Body, the Government published their response earlier this year in a paper called, A safe bet for success. It outlined the strategy for updating the regulation of gambling and for a range of measures that would help the industry thrive in the 21st century. Most of those measures require further consideration of detailed points, but they will form the basis of a new wide-ranging gambling Bill.

However, where we can help the industry in the meantime with some interim changes, such as those contained in this order, it is right that we should do so. It does not represent any fundamental change in policy and will serve to implement a specific recommendation contained in the Gambling Review Body's report. It is a timely sensible extension of what is already permitted and, as such, it should be welcomed. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 12th June be approved [32nd Report from the Joint Committee].—(Lord Davies of Oldham.)

Lord Luke

My Lords, the Minister will be pleased to hear that there is absolutely no objection from these Benches to the measure. I do not have any questions either.

Viscount Falkland

My Lords, the last time I spoke about betting offices in this House was nine years ago regarding the Licensed Betting Offices (Amendment) regulations. On that day I had grave reservations about those regulations. I am happy to tell the noble Lord that I have no such reservations today.

On that occasion we discussed extending the opening hours for betting shops on Saturday evenings to 10 o'clock. My remarks were mainly about the employment of women and what I thought were the unsatisfactory preparations which bookmakers had made.

I made some fairly trenchant remarks on that occasion. They were provoked, if I may say so without speaking ill of the dead, by the late Lord Wyatt of Weeford. In extolling betting shops he described them in a manner which I thought presented them as places full of daffodils and families. Indeed, he said: Betting is a high, moral occupation".—[0fficial Report, 22/2/93; col. 34.] That so incensed me that I am afraid I went slightly over the top and talked about many betting shops having a seedy and dispiriting atmosphere and being full of people chasing their losses and sometimes people of criminal intent.

I was taken to task for that by the only daily publication which—happily—is not in your Lordships' House. It describes itself as the newspaper adults read and has "Sport" in its title. Three pages were devoted to reviling my remarks on that occasion. I was referred to not only as a "dotty peer", but as a "pain in the `orse". Of course a copy of that paper has become a treasured possession of mine. In the past two or three years, however, the Sun—a very respectable newspaper in comparison—has been kind enough to label me "the punters' friend", and my birthday is now regularly reported in the Racing Post. So whatever misdemeanours I committed on that occasion have probably vanished well into the past—at least, I hope so.

On a serious point, one cannot object to people wanting refreshments in betting shops. I do not want to appear too familiar with betting shops, but I do know something about them and have been in them over the years. At present, when people want refreshment they go round the corner to buy it—and in London they are well served with sandwich bars and cafes of all kinds. That is not a good thing for bookmakers, who rely on a steady turnover. If people leave the betting shop to eat and drink elsewhere, they may miss the next dog race. The great thing that bookmakers want to do is to get people betting all the time.

However, if people are expecting betting offices to be centres of gastronomic excellence, they can think again. One of the characteristics of betting shops—if I can paint this picture without making them seem too seedy and dispiriting—is that most of the people in them who back horses regularly are chain-smokers. Betting offices are absolutely thick with smoke. I do not think that anyone, apart from the most compulsive punter chasing his losses, would want to enjoy a sandwich in a betting shop. But good luck to the bookmakers if they can produce something tolerable that people want to eat. I have no objection to that. It is the business of bookmakers to get as much turnover as they can—and now, under the excellent new tax structures introduced by the Government, that benefits racing as a whole.

In summary, I hope that I have not been "a pain in the 'orse" to the House, or to the noble Lord on the Government Front Bench. I repeat: on behalf of these Benches, I welcome the order.

Lord Davies of Oldham

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Luke, for his wholehearted support, and to the noble Viscount, Lord Falkland, for his slightly more conditional support. I recognise that the noble Viscount has had to learn the error of his ways over an earlier decade. I refer to the stance that he took with regard to betting shops in the 1990s—although it may not be "the error of his ways", because betting shops have improved immeasurably since that time. I imagine that not all are of a universally high standard. We can only quote as we see. My visit to a betting shop tends to be an annual one—on the day of the Grand National when I join the vast majority of my fellow citizens in a wager. I must say that my annual visit is always attended by an extraordinary improvement in the facilities for punters who use the betting shop with somewhat greater regularity. People get a great deal of innocent pleasure out of betting. Why should we not make the experience as comfortable and enjoyable for them as we can?

The noble Viscount is right to indicate that in some areas of the country—certainly in most parts of London—it may be extremely convenient to nip out for refreshment within easy reach elsewhere. But that may not be the case universally. There are some betting shops where punters do not have easy access to refreshment when they need it. Therefore, it is only right that we recognise that a diet largely restricted to crisps and chocolate can now be extended—with nothing but benefit for those who take advantage of the opportunity. On that basis, I commend the order to the House.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Lord Davies of Oldham

My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn during pleasure until 8.21 p.m.

Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.

[The Sitting was suspended from 8.11 to 8.21 p.m.]