 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
Racecourses are facilitating Illegal gambling
Boost for ABB membership
Treasury Consultation
There is no "Right" to sell
Voluntary Contributions
Integrity in Sports Betting
Holding the Commission to Account
Betting Sector Statistics
Betting Shop Robbery
Self Exclusion - The debate continues
What does membership get you?
Violence in the Workplace
Racecourses who hire corporate boxes to "in running" layers on betting exchanges are, in the view of the ABB, providing illegal facilities for remote gambling. Such activity does not fall within any exemption under the track licence and therefore facilities which accomodate high specification PCs, specialist software and faster TV pictures (which in themselves create an unfair advantage)are in our view illegal.The facilites are the box itself, the TV screens and the related utilities; it is irrelevant whether or not the computer equipment is brought to the track by the individual layers. The majority of racecourses now accept regular bookings from unlicensed layers who are present at just about every race meeting. The provision of such facilities does not fall within the exemption under S37(4) of the Gambling Act and without the necessary operating and premises licences the provision of any facilities is illegal. The ABB is calling upon racecourses to desisit from such activity and for the Gambling Commission to properly enforce the law in this area
[top]
On 12 October, the ABB Council approved applications for membership of the ABB by Coral Racing Ltd and the Tote. There will be a members meeting at our Norris St headquarters on Thursday 29th October (1200) to approve changes to the Articles of Association to faciltate Coral Racing's involvement as a Council member. There will be a further meeting at which members will be asked to approve further changes to facilate the Tote joining the Council. ABB Chairman Warwick Bartlett said "said “Even in lean times the ABB has remained relevant and highly regarded by all industry stakeholders. These developments will bring in excess of a further 2000 betting shops under the ABB banner at a time when the industry needs to present a united front. I would urge all betting operators of whatever size to consider joining the ABB and strengthen the voice of the industry’s principal trade association.”
[top]
The Treasury consultation on whether or not to change the taxation of gaming machines to a gross profits tax basis (replacing the current licensing regime and a system where VAT is charged on machine profits) is now closed and we are awaiting the consultation response. The ABB's position is set out below: - Gaming machines are an important part of our business model and the revenue from them keeps many marginal shops open. - We support a move to GPT in principle, but Ministers must set a rate which arrests decline and promotes growth. - We are urging the Treasury, to whom we have had ready access, to set a rate as close to 15% as possible. Setting a rate above that will lead to business closures (especially amongst independents). - If a punative rate is set then there will be numerous shop closures with up to 8000 betting shop jobs at risk. In the medium term this will lead to a falling tax yield and there will be other negative consequences such as an increase in illegal gambling and a migration to other gambling mediums which do not yield as much tax for Government. - The high street betting industry already pays significantly more in tax than it makes in profit and contributes £400 million more in tax than an equivalent sized non gambling sector. - The industry is now feeling the effects of the recession with OTC and telephone betting receipts declining. There is still single digit growth in machine income, but even that is falling back. -The Government needs to consider lifting some of the regulatory restrictions on betting shops and reducing regulatory costs.
[top]
The French Government, fearing that its state gambling monopoly may be illegal under EU law has plans to partially liberalise the market (but not horserace betting). As part of these measures, the French Goverment has interpreted French law in a way which gives sports governing bodies the capacity to sell a "right" to bet on their respective sports to betting operators. Such a "right" does not exist in UK law and this is not the way the market has developed in our more liberalised society. Not suprisingly, the Sports Rights Owners Coalition in the UK want DCMS to implement similar primary legislation to try and secure further revenue from bookmakers. We do not believe there is a sound evidence or policy base to support the SROC case and we believe that this is merely an attempt to secure even more unjustifed funding from the betting industry. This is a further example of the "begging bowl" mentality which prevents UK sport from modernising. Elite sport is generally well funded, bur in 2009/2010 sport will receive over £200 million from the funding body Sport England from a combination of Lottery funding and DCMS grants. Scottish sport will receive £113 million over two years. From 2009 to 2013, sports governing bodies will receive around half a billion pounds in funding in addition to commercial revenue streams Betting already enhances interest in sport and bookmakers spend considerable sums on sponsorship. Horseracing is directly funded by bookmakers through a levy (£90 million per year) despite its declining popularity. It is arguable that the horserace levy is, in part, illegal state aid and any stautory funding system may fall into the same category.
[top]
The structure for voluntary funding of research education and treatment of problem gambling has now changed with the GREaT Foundationow replacing RIGT as the industry fundraiser.- Most members will now have received requests for voluntary funding being 0.085% of gross profits. That is 85 pence per £1000 of gross profit or a minimum payment of £250 whichever is the greater.- in difficult times and with betting shop profits declining, we realise that £250 is a lot of money to find for some independent members.- We would encourage members to make contributions in line with the agreed funding formula, but would be pleased to receive members views on this issue.- We enjoy a good relationship with the GREaT Foudation and they are always willing to listen; particularly if this is causing hardship for any member.
[top]
The ABB welcomes the continued efforts of the specialist Sports Integrity Panel being chaired by Mr Rick Parry. We also welcome the fact that the terms of reference of the panel are narrowly focussed on sports betting integrity issues and not on the issue of the promotion of sports “rights”. The Minister has already made it clear that the issues of sports betting integrity and “rights” can be separated and we would resist strongly any attempt by sport to widen the terms of reference to include calls for additional unjustified funding from bookmakers. the Gambling Commission has already found that whilst there have been certain high profile cases of sport being corrupted for betting purposes that there is little or no evidence of widespread abuse in the UK. Risks are well documented, but incidents are few. The ABB and its members are vigilant and from time to time identify suspicious betting patterns. The ABB coordinates intelligence activity and works closely with sports governing bodies (SGBs) and the Gambling Commission to ensure that matters are promptly reported. The ABB has signed a number of MOUs with key SGBs. The CCPR and the Sports Rights Owners Coalition, in an attempt to secure more funding for sport, continue to exagerrate the scale of the problem. The ABB has already called for an increase in the quality of the debate over this issue including sport being able to articulate the architecture they would put in place to deal with the isolated issues that do occur from time to time. The report from the panel is expected around the middle of December.
[top]
With DCMS approving proposals made by the Gambling Commission to raise annual fees for independent bookmakers by 4.75% and for major operators by 6.25%, there has never been a more important time for the ABB to hold the Commission to account These rises are to make up for shortfalls in the Commission's projected budget, but in our view the Commission's budget needs to be reduced as they now have less to regulate and they should be making greater efficiency savings. Costs for independent bookmakers are continually increasing and the recent BRE report into the Commission's performance found that the Commission's risk assessment process was "a vision which has yet to take effect". We believe that as the number of visits to independent bookmakers reduces then fees should also reduce. The Conservatives have said that each regulator will have to justify its existence or be abolished. On current performance and value for money the Commission may have a difficult task.
[top]
The ABB's response to the release of statistics on the betting sector by the Gambling Commission is set out below: • Self Exclusion- On the face of it commentators could represent the figure as high, but if one takes into account the number of betting premises (8862), the number of bets struck 1,544 million then the statistics, like the prevalence study, show that the majority of customers gamble harm free. It also shows that as guardians of the scheme, betting operators are making it readily available to customers and are not shirking their responsibilities. Some of these self exclusions will be multi premises exclusions by the same person(s) • Breaches of Self Exclusion- Any breach of self exclusion is unfortunate, but this must be put into the context that around 60% of self excluders do not supply a photograph and many of those opt for multi premises exclusions. Therefore enforcement of self exclusion by betting shop staff is difficult in the face of determined efforts to gamble. Problem or at risk gamblers also bear responsibility to desist from gambling. It does demonstrate that for many self exclusion works. • Underage Gambling- On the face of it the stats show that 85,000 under 18s entered betting shops in the financial year to 31 March 2009. However what this really shows is that there were 85,000 challenges made by betting shop staff to a combination of under 18s and to those over 18, but who looked under 21 who could not produce ID when challenged. A further 22000 were detected by betting operators after they had gambled. Again this is a combination of under 18s and those without ID, but again it demonstrates proactivity by betting shop staff who have stopped potentially underage people from continuing to gamble. In contrast to the previous negative reporting around age verification, these figures demonstrate that betting operators are challenging young people and ensuring that betting shops are places for adults only. • Integrity in Sport Betting- The figures bear out our view that integrity in sports betting is an important issue, but nevertheless there are very few incidents. We welcome the formation of the specialist panel to look into this issue
[top]
Please see the security section of the members area for some key messages on betting shop security. With a further spate of betting shop robberies in North London, the ABB has again re-emphasised that it will pay a reward of up to £10K for information which leads to the detection and prevention of betting shop robberies. The ABB is keen to publicise the availability of its reward scheme which demonstrates the industry's determination to minimise the risk to betting shop staff. People with valid information can contact police or Crimestoppers and each case will be considered in its merits. Offering a reward scheme is part of a package of measures to reduce the incidence of betting shop crime (Please see our article on reducing violence in the workplace)
[top]
The Court of Appeal (16 December 2008), in dismissing an appeal by Graham Calvert against the previous decision of the High Court, has found that a bookmaker’s duty of care does not extend to preventing a person who has asked to be self excluded from gambling; the limit of a bookmaker's responsibility is to assist a person to control their gambling (within the limits of the self exclusion agreement)and the consequences of a person's wider gambling activity cannot be ignored when making an assessment of losses flowing from a bookmaker's failure to action a self exclusion agreement properly. This judgement, in our view, places responsibility to control their gambling very much in the hands of the individual. Whilst betting operators have to abide by the Gambling Commission’s Licensing Conditions and Code provisions on self exclusion, this judgment reopens the debate on the effectiveness of self exclusion and particularly the onus that is put on betting shop staff to police self exclusion in the face of determined efforts by some to break their agreements. The industry fully supports the facilitation of self exclusion, but some operators are finding that gamblers are trying to use self exclusion as an insurance policy; refusing to supply a photograph with their details and then playing the self exclusion card when they have evaded detection and incurred further losses. Persons who wish to self exclude are asked to sign an agreement which excludes them from a betting shop for a minimum of six months (up to 5 years), they are asked to provide photographs so that attempts to break the agreement can be detected by betting shop staff. The Commission recently announced that there would be no further changes to the self exclusion regime at this time, but the Regulator has in the past appeared cynical about the industry’s view that the principal responsibility for control of their gambling rest with the individual. The industry has made submissions that self exclusion is difficult to police if an individual refuses to provide a photograph or opts for self exclusion from an operator’s entire betting shop estate. You can view a copy of the judgement in the members area (Gambling Commission section). The ABB will be raising the matter with the Gambling Commission. (Please see the article on LCCP changes below)
[top]
The ABB remains the principal trade association for high street bookmakers. The ABB negotiates with central and local Government and the Regulator to get the best deal it can for the industry (small operators as well as the large chains) In difficult economic times and in a climate where Government seems to have an appetite for more not less costly regulation, it is important that bookmakers speak with a collective voice. One of our main roles is to hold those who impose excessive costs on the industry to account and to demonstrate the real facts about the industry. The ABB provides advice on the Gambling Commission regime, health and safety and employment issues and can help represent individual bookmakers who are experiencing difficulty with a local authority or the Gambling Commission. If we can't help we know someone who can. We can also provide essential documents such as self exclusion material, template rules and template written policies and procedures. You are also required to train your staff in certain areas and we can assist in this area We already run the ABB insurance scheme which provides significant discounts and in the New Year we will be introducing further membership discount schemes. If you are a single shop operator, a small chain or even an operator with a significant estate why not let us act as your compliance consultant? It makes financial sense and there will be a significant saving in terms of management time.
[top]
The safety of betting shop staff remains high on the ABB agenda and both the UK and Scottish Goverments have asked the industry to participate in forums to discuss this broad issue which covers the full spectrum from betting shop robbery to abusive customers. Whilst staff health and safety is a priority for our members, there are those who are prepared to cast the industry in a bad light and would wish to impose costly, universal and disproportionate security standards on an already heavily regulated industry. The ABB sees proper risk assessment and staff training as key, with operators applying proportionate security standards to meet real risk. This process should involve consultation with betting shop staff. The ABB has called on all operators (including non members) to support this initiative which is of benefit to all. The ABB is in the final stages of producing a document that outlines minimum security standards for the industry and we have also produced training packages on reducing violence in the workplace and reducing the risk of betting shop robbery. These packages, which are subject to copyright,are free to members and can be obtained by calling the ABB office on 02074342111 or e-mailing andrewlyman@abb.uk.com. Non members can also obtain these packages, but there will be a proportionate charge to cover development costs and staff time spent on this issue.
[top]
association of british bookmakers
info@abb.uk.com
tel: 020 7434 2111
