Brian Lemon, general secretary of the Casino Operators Association said: "The report in the FT on the impact on tourism of the new Gambling Bill is interesting but lacks balance.It essentially urges acceptance of the proposals on purely financial, foreign inward investment grounds for the casino industry albeit linking it to tourism and conference centre growth.In so doing it accepts that casinos are the key to such developments, and without large and super-sized casinos with great numbers of machines the investment will not be forthcoming.

"But the article carries little to assuage the concerns that such surge in casinos will bring dangers in its wake, distorting not only the current casino industry, but having substantial impact on other gambling and entertainment businesses, and that the required customer support for gambling will inevitably bring difficulties in problem gambling and associated knock-on effects.

"These are all potential difficulties that the Joint Parliamentary (Scrutiny) Committee recognised in their report of 7 April 2004.They also complained, quite rightly, that they were unable to do their job properly because of lack of information in several key areas including, for example, proper assessment of the proposed watchdog that is fundamental to future control, and the mechanism within local and regional government which will be key to the siting and proliferation control of such expansion.In short, the Joint Parliamentary Committee’s 139 point Report flags up not only support for change, but also advocates measures that would restrict too great expansion, too soon.A prime example of the latter is their proposed cap on the maximum number of machines in one super-sized resort casino to 1000/1250, which restriction is anathema to international investors.Clearly, the Committee recognise that investors could take their money elsewhere as Lady Cobham warns, but they are saying that investment in itself cannot be the only driver.Does Lady Cobham believe that foreign money comes without strings?Without the import of foreign requirements?Why should all these Gulf States citizens come to Britain for a Las Vegas experience?

"A large part of any equation must be that we retain a strong element of Britishness in our approach;that the proposed Gambling Bill is as well thought-out and foolproof in its impact as possible;and it must include a retrieval mechanism for when things go wrong.The Joint Committee has urged that parliament recalls the Committee to consider the, at present, missing gaps, perhaps in the summer.

"This is vital to the process of getting the Bill right, and if it takes time, so be it. If it means that the greater good is achieved by delaying or curtailing inward investment, that should be the way forward.If it takes time to set up the Gambling Commission properly and with proper interface with the local, regional and national authorities, it is time well spent.

"This is a one-time opportunity and rushing a flawed Bill through to make a parliamentary deadline is not acceptable.

"No one with knowledge of the casino industry in Britain would deny that the 1968 Gaming Act requires change (and, indeed, by deregulation measures and modern interpretation changes have already been introduced).But all the considerable work that has gone into the proposed Bill will not be wasted even if there is a snap election.The Bill would be delayed, not halted irrevocably so long as we have a balanced, measured and fully workable solution that any government can sign up to with confidence.

"At present, that confidence is not yet in place."