for early access to the latest igaming videos!
and get the latest igaming news first!
A Labour MP has told Parliament the current gambling licensing regime is failing communities, as campaigners and councillors step up pressure on the government to loosen what they call a built-in bias toward approving new betting shops and 24-hour adult gaming centres.
Feryal Clark, the MP for Enfield North, used a Commons debate this week to argue that the Gambling Act 2005’s “aim to permit” principle is driving the clustering of gambling premises in poorer areas and leaving councils exposed to costly appeals if they try to push back.
A debate focused on high-street clustering
The discussion was initiated by Brent East MP Dawn Butler, who has been building support in Westminster and across London for changes to the Gambling Act. In the debate, MPs repeatedly returned to the same issue: local licensing authorities say they can set conditions, but they struggle to refuse new premises when applicants meet baseline requirements.
Clark told MPs her constituency now has 30 gambling premises and said residents have repeatedly raised concerns about the concentration of outlets on local high streets.
She puts the argument in simple terms, describing gambling-related harm as something that shows up in everyday life, not just in statistics.
“Aim to permit” back in the spotlight
Under the post-2005 structure, councils are required to “aim to permit” gambling in line with the Act’s objectives and the Gambling Commission’s guidance, a structure critics say creates a default tilt toward approval.
In the Commons, Clark argued that the real-world effect is that councils can feel boxed in even when they believe an area is already saturated or when local opposition is strong. She warned that when councils try to refuse, they can end up facing legal challenge and expensive appeals. In one of the debate’s sharpest lines, she said:
“If councils do not follow that instruction to err on the side of approval, they face legal challenge, costly appeals and the threat of court costs.”
Outside Westminster, the argument is also being carried by various local politicians. Reporting in early January described a cross-party letter coordinated by Butler urging Prime Minister Keir Starmer to scrap “aim to permit,” with campaigners saying it “ties the hands” of councils.
Government response: cumulative impact checks, but no immediate repeal pledge
Responding on behalf of the government, creative industries minister Ian Murray acknowledged the scale of harm raised in the debate and said ministers want councils to feel able to make “data-driven decisions” that reflect local needs.
Murray pointed to Labour’s plan to introduce cumulative impact assessments for gambling premises, similar in concept to tools used in alcohol licensing, designed to let councils weigh the combined effect of multiple venues in an area. He told MPs:
“Our plans to introduce cumulative impact assessments are an important part of that commitment, and we will bring them forward as soon as a legislative vehicle is available.”
At least in the near term, while campaigners want “aim to permit” removed entirely, the ministers are taking a different stance. The policy movement via cumulative impact assessments, plus the provision of other local tools, will give councils some degree of control in the near term, but is this what they want?
Industry pushback: high-street role and a shrinking retail footprint
On the other hand, industry bodies have rejected the council’s claims that betting shops are simply spreading unchecked.
The Betting and Gaming Council has argued that shops contribute to job creation and tax revenue, and that the overall number of betting shops has fallen in recent years. But this argument may not hold much water, as it has been regularly deployed when campaigners link gambling venues to high-street decline.
Even with an unresponsive government, can Butler keep pressing for answers?
With the political push for sharper control on gambling on high streets, operators and everyone else should be aware that there may be more compliance issues and stronger regulations.
The political focus is moving from individual premises compliance to the cumulative presence of gambling on high streets, particularly in areas of deprivation.
Whether the next step is limited, via cumulative impact assessments, or more fundamental, via rewriting “aim to permit”, will depend on how quickly ministers find parliamentary time and how hard MPs like Clark and Butler keep pressing the case through 2026.
Source: Enfield Dispatch
