The Department for Culture, Media and Sport has given an update on the progress of the draft gambling bill, which it hopes will become law at the end of next year.

One of the world's largest casino operators has warned that billions of pounds of investment and the chance to regenerate swathes of Britain are at risk if proposed reforms to gambling laws are scaled back.

The warning from Las Vegas Sands, owner of the Venetian in Las Vegas, follows a report from a cross-party committee of MPs and peers that called for the number of slot machines in each casino to be capped.

Government Response: Department for Culture, Media and Sport

Tessa Jowell, secretary of state for culture, media and sport, said: "I was very pleased that the scrutiny committee accepted our view that new controls are urgently needed to keep up with changes in technology.

"Modernisation is essential if we are to keep gambling fair, crime free, and protect children and vulnerable people from new
and old temptations. I want to introduce a Gambling Bill as soon as possible, hopefully later this year.

"Britain has one of the lowest rates of problem gambling in the developed world. This is at risk if we do not act now and bring our laws up to date. The new powers and protections in this Bill, some recommended by the scrutiny committee and some going much further than they suggested, are all intended to keep Britain's problem gambling rate amongst the lowest.

"We only propose giving adults additional consumer choice where we can also protect children and vulnerable players. And before
implementation of the new regime, we will carry out a national study of participation in gambling and the prevalence of problem gambling. The new national regulator will then conduct further studies every
three years.

"If the evidence tells us that we need to be tougher to protect the public, then we will be. And the new Gambling Commission will be able to initiate its own prosecutions and impose unlimited fines for breaches of licence conditions, like the Financial Services
Authority.

"If there is sustained evidence that reform has gone well, then we can consider allowing further choice. But we will be cautious for now and will always put the interests of children and vulnerable players
first, second and third."

Forum Response: Casino Operators Association

Brian Lemon, general secretary of the Casino Operators Association said: "The comment in the Financial Times of 14th June 2004 that a US Casino Group warns against a cap on slot machines is entirely to be expected. The US industry essentially runs on slot machines in vast numbers and they want them immediately. This would introduce in UK an expansion in a form and style of gambling hitherto unseen in Britain, which at the same time introduces further unnecessary risk because of the 'big bang' approach.

"The COA (UK) has advocated from the outset that change to the gambling industry and casinos in particular should be measured, balanced, controlled and predictable with the ability to step back if the changes prove unacceptable or undesirable in terms of social, financial or lifestyle impact.

"We are not against machines per se: the current versions are enjoyed by many players and sensible expansion would be welcome. But these unlimited casino machine proposals which have been pointedly rejected by the joint parliamentary scrutiny committee and endorsed by DCMS to a limit of 1250 machines, indicates the level of concern.

"In short, they seek to introduce an element of balance and control, but even that attempt is still grossly stacked against small British casinos by the DCMS proposals to limit small, existing casinos to a lower machine to table ratio of 2:1 and at a lower (category B) rate of stakes and prizes. An outrageous bias against the current industry to support US style operations, based on the suspect premise that even a modest increase in machines in small casinos is a bad thing.

"The current casino industry in Britain has served this country well, with virtually no public concern, for 34 years. These proposals, allegedly to provide improved consumer gambling choice, are restrictive to current players who prefer their local venue and anti-competition in that they do not allow small casinos the use of modern machines to offset the impact of the bias towards new large casinos.

"Further, because small casinos have a hands-on, detailed relationship with its customers, they know them well. We believe this to be a key reason for the lower incidence of problem gambling in current UK casinos and thus expansion to large-scale, more impersonal operations warrants caution in approach.

"When sufficient positive UK evidence is available to warrant the permission to allow unlimited machine operations, then the foreign companies may have something to offer.

"Until then government should concentrate on getting the balance of casino operations right by allowing sensible expansion in the safe hands of current operators, and by curtailing the damaging desire for 'big bang' expansions of a new, US style industry."

Forum Response: GamCare

Peter Cox, managing director of GamCare, said: "GamCare feels it would be better to progress the planned modernisation of UK gambling laws on a gradual basis.

"Las Vegas is perceived as a dedicated gambling venue and therefore GamCare would be concerned if many versions of Las Vegas emerged in UK quickly.

"The Australian experience, where the legislation was relaxed virtually overnight, should always be borne in mind.

"Once launched in this way it is always difficult to bring in amendments and thus a measured approach must make sense with regular reviews on both the commercial and problem gambling developments so that remedial action can be taken where necessary."

Forum Response: Salvation Army

A spokesman for the Salvation Army said: "The Salvation Army thinks that despite some safeguards, the government's gambling proposals are still likely to cause a rise in problem gambling. 

"We have consistently argued for better protection for vulnerable people and feel that the expansion of a leisure activity is still being given precedence over the welfare of thousands of people whose lives are ruined by problem gambling.

"The parliamentary Joint Committee on the Draft Gambling bill echoed our fears that problem gambling would rise as a result of some of the measures included in the draft bill. We are disappointed, therefore, that the government still sees more problem gambling as an acceptable price to pay for more gambling opportunities.

"There is absolutely no public demand for a liberalisation of the UK's gambling regulations. An NOP poll commissioned by the Salvation Army found that 93 per cent of the public felt that there were enough opportunities to gamble in the UK already. This lack of demand begs the question as to why potentially harmful expansion is taking place.

"The Salvation Army is pleased that the government has listened to concerns expressed by churches, charities and academics, and now proposes removing fruit machines from unlicensed premises such as fish and chip shops and mini cab offices. However, there is disappointment that children and young people will still be allowed to play fruit machines in some arcades.

"It is particularly disappointing that the government proposes to maintain Britain's unique position in the developed world in allowing children to gamble on low-value fruit machines. By removing fruit machines from unlicensed premises the government has already accepted that fruit machines are unsafe for children. If this is the case, the government must explain why they are safe in arcades where children are free to enter without an adult.

"The Salvation Army, which gave oral evidence to the Joint Committee on the Draft Gambling Bill, is pleased that the government will place a cap on the number of unlimited prize fruit machines allowed in regional casinos. Research indicates that these machines, which have unlimited stakes and prizes, are amongst the most addictive forms of gambling.

"The Salvation Army and the Methodist Church believe that it is vital to cap the number of these machines, but think that the cap must be set at a much lower level so that these new machines are introduced into the UK very cautiously.

"Gambling of any kind requires advanced mental processes, all of which are impaired by the consumption of alcohol. We believe the introduction of alcohol to casino gaming floors is a mistake that can only lead people to lose more money.

"This view is supported by 82 per cent of the population who think that people are more likely to lose money if they drink alcohol while gambling. The reserve power to remove alcohol from gaming floors included in the government's proposal is completely inadequate, as it allows a problem to emerge first before addressing it."