BRITAIN
The Institute for Public Policy Research estimates gambling costs the UK more than £100 million.
IN 2005, a law to liberalise gambling was passed by the Labour government. Following a vociferous public campaign, it was only then that the government was forced to abandon its plans for giant super-casinos across the country.
Nevertheless, with neither fanfare nor further public debate, the new law effectively allowed every high street betting shop to turn itself into a casino – by installing fixed-odds betting terminals (FOBTs). These touch screen machines, which are so addictive they’re compared to using crack cocaine, offer casino-style games such as roulette, blackjack and poker. In just 20 seconds, a player can gamble – and lose – £100.
Today, it is clear that the social consequences have been catastrophic. Driven by the greed of bookmakers’ in their quest for riches, the number of machines has doubled in just a decade to 35,000. It is no coincidence that the number of problem gamblers has also more than doubled, to almost 600,000.
Meanwhile, we have seen rising violence in betting shops, more family breakdown and ballooning levels of personal debt. Inevitably, it is the poorest communities – where the highest concentration of betting shops are found – which have suffered most.
For those hopeless and desperate gambling addicts who stand like zombies, pumping in money until they have none left, these corrosive machines are life-destroying. But more depressingly, they destroy the lives of those closest to them, mostly the wives and children of those who have become addicted. The bookmakers, meanwhile, profit to the tune of £1.8billion a year.
To his eternal shame, David Cameron also failed to confront this problem with the necessary political rigour that was needed. Instead, what we got was a token effort, in the form of a registration scheme for those wanting to bet more than £50, which was cynically exploited by bookmakers who could target addicts with mouth-watering offers. He ducked entirely the one change that would have made a difference: by reducing the maximum stake. That stank of surrender to the army of betting industry lobbyists.
Now there is good reason to fear we may face another betrayal. Last year ministers launched a new crackdown on fixed-odds machines which promised to consider cutting the maximum stake.
The review has, however, stalled because those at the Treasury fear losing vast sums of tax revenues if stakes are cut from £100 to the suggested £2.
For many, this will seem an utterly immoral position. It is also deeply misguided, for it ignores the benefit to the taxpayer which would come from limiting these rapacious machines. Isn’t it obvious that the State will save a fortune by not having to rescue the countless families broken by addictive gambling?
Chancellor Philip Hammond’s position sits very uncomfortable with a government led by Theresa May, who came into office determined to fight for the vulnerable against unfettered and exploitative capitalism.
As the daughter of a clergyman, Mrs May won’t need the Church of England to say – as it commendably did last week – that these machines are deeply iniquitous.
After a disastrous election, reigning them in is exactly the kind of policy which would prove that Mrs May’s government retains both its authority and moral purpose.
Very few issues in politics are black and white. But with fixed-odds betting terminals, the case for controlling them is unanswerable. The Treasury should consider its position on FOBTs and realise the huge damage that addiction to them is causing.
Arts, reviews & current affairs 