Trying to prevent the growing number of gambling premises in the borough “feels like a losing battle”, according to Brent Council Leader, Cllr Muhammed Butt. It is becoming increasingly more difficult to walk more than a few hundred feet along the high streets without passing a bookies, casino, or adult gaming centre (AGC).
Brent’s Local Plan states that no more than 4 per cent of town centre frontage should be betting shops, and no more than 3 per cent of it consisting of adult gaming centres. However, more recently there has been a growing number of applications for bingo licences – which is not included in the section of local planning policy that seeks to prevent the over-concentration of potentially harmful premises.
Located just 200 feet apart on Wembley High Road are two Silvertime premises. Although one has an adult gaming licence whilst the other has a bingo licence, it is nearly impossible to tell the difference between the two – both inside and out. Cllr Butt said “they look exactly the same”, with the bingo hall operating just like an AGC.
To be classed as a bingo hall the premises must meet the ‘80-20 rule’, which means that 80 per cent of the offering needs to be made up of lower-stake machines – with £1 being the maximum stake to play bingo. However, the council has said companies are “exploiting the law” and using “a loophole” by simply providing bingo on a stack of tablet computers in a small area of the shop and using the rest of the floor space for higher stakes machines.
A Brent Council spokesperson said: “There are lots of tablets, which means they meet the 80 per cent rule of lower-stake machine density, but these devices don’t take up much physical space. This means the rest of the floor space can be taken up with the higher stake “B category” machines, which are usually the large colourful jackpot machines.”
Cllr Butt wants bingo halls to be categorised in the same way as adult gaming centres, as well as for local authorities to have more power to reject licence applications that it feels “threatens the community’s welfare and safety”. Until then the council has little power to stop them, largely due to the Gambling Act’s ‘Aim To Permit’ duty that makes councils prioritise approval – which it is campaigning for the government to change.
The local authority also wants Public Health to be consulted as a ‘responsible authority’ for applications, with gambling policy handled through the health department – like in many European countries – rather than from the culture, media, and sport department as it currently is in England. As public health is a consideration when approving fast food outlets, Cllr Butt said currently it’s “easier to stop a chicken shop next to a school than a gambling site”.
Brent has been encouraged by a recent case in Sheffield where the city’s director of public health was able to quash a gambling company’s appeal of a decision to refuse an arcade centre. They successfully argued that gambling harms are increased in “sensitive locations” that are frequented by children and vulnerable people.
A council spokesperson said: “In Brent, we’ve recently compiled and published an evidence based assessment, which demonstrates that gambling is a public health issue. What we would like to see is a reduction in the overconcentration of these premises in deprived areas.
“People who live closer to a higher concentration of Licenced Betting Offices have higher rates of ‘problem gambling’. In Brent, gambling premises are clustered in the more deprived neighbourhoods – particularly around Harlesden, Kensal Green, Kilburn and Wembley Central.”
The Government’s All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Gambling Reform has also highlighted the impact that the growing number of these types of premises is having on people and communities. The Group’s Chair, Sir Iain Duncan Smith, told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS): “I am deeply concerned about the proliferation of AGCs across the country, particularly in areas of socio-economic deprivation.
“The excessive number of AGCs on our high streets, as well as widespread breaches of licensing codes, are highly problematic and are inflicting devastating harms on individuals and communities. The Gambling Commission must do more to ensure that AGCs are prevented from breaching codes and to ensure that they comply with their requirements around social responsibility. At the same time, the government must urgently review the current ‘aim to permit’ requirement for local authorities.”
Bacta – the trade association and strategic body representing the amusements and low-stake gambling industry, including AGCs – told the LDRS “there is no loop hole” and its members operate under “a clear licensing framework and comply with strict rules.”
The organisation’s president, Joseph Cullis, said: “Bingo licences are a legitimate category with specific obligations, and all venues must meet the same high regulatory standards. Local authorities already have strong powers to refuse or revoke licences where the licensing objectives are at risk, and these should be applied consistently before further changes are considered.
“We support evidence-based measures that genuinely reduce risk. There’s no evidence that simply having more venues automatically causes harm – what matters is that they are well-run, compliant, and protect customers. Many of our members have operated safely in the same communities for decades, contributing to local high streets and coastal economies.”
The Betting and Gaming Council (BGC), which represents high street betting shops and the casino sector, told the LDRS its members “are proud of the role they play on hard-pressed high streets”. It said UK betting shops “support 46,000 jobs, contribute £1bn a year in tax to the Treasury and another £60m in business rates to local councils”.
A BGC Spokesperson added: “As set out in the Government’s White Paper on gambling reform, local authorities already have significant powers when considering licence applications. The White Paper confirmed that the ‘aim to permit’ requirement […] does not prevent the refusal of licences or the introduction of controls where necessary to minimise risk. It also committed to enabling councils to carry out cumulative impact assessments to support licensing decisions.”
In response, Cllr Butt described the economic benefit of the premises as “nominal” as they operate with “few employees” and a growing number of betting shops “contributes to higher levels of crime in a community”. The council leader also claimed one of the biggest obstacles to implementing change is the effectiveness of the gambling industry’s lobbying in order to gain access to influential decision-makers.
Cllr Butt said: “[…] the gambling industry is big business. Most Brent residents would be horrified to learn how Members of Parliament are lobbied by an industry whose harmful products drain money from people’s pockets, hollow out our high streets, and contribute far too little to the public purse. […] For too long, the interests of the industry have been put ahead of the health and wellbeing of communities.”
Mr Cullis said Bacta speak to the government “openly and transparently” to ensure decisions are based on evidence, which he called “responsible representation, not undue influence”. The BCG said it “engages constructively” with government and parliamentarians to ensure policies are “evidence-led and balanced”.
The BCG claim that around 22.5m people in Britain make a bet each month, the majority of which “do so safely and responsibly”. Cllr Butt said that, whilst he is “not against gambling”, if the high street is going to fit the needs of all residents “I can’t have ten [gambling premises] here”.
He added: “Until the balance of power fully shifts away from the industry to the public, communities like ours will keep paying the price in lives, health and public money.”
Don’t miss out on the biggest stories from across the city: Sign up to MyLondon’s The 12 HERE for the 12 biggest stories each day.
