Update to the Report for the Regulatory
Committee 6 November 2006.
Appendix 3
Gambling Act 2005
Schedule of Consultation Responses
|
|
Respondent |
Comments |
Appraisal |
Response |
|
1 |
Roger Etchells Chartered Surveyors The Old Bank Ashby-de-la-Zouch Leicestershire LE65 2FR |
“We consider that paragraph 7.6 of your guidelines relating to conditions is explicitly contrary to the guidance issued by the Gambling Commission” “Further we believe the Council’s approach is in conflict with the Gambling Commission’s guidance to local authorities (April 2006)”. (In particular paragraph 9.22 & 9.27) “We strongly suggest that the policy be amended to delete the reference to a ‘pool of conditions’ contrary to the guidance.” |
Paragraph 9.27 of the Guidance states that it is the commission’s view that additional conditions published by the Commission will not be necessary and that a local authority will be able to attach individual conditions. Section 169(1) of the Gambling Act 2005 expressly allows local authorities to impose conditions and paragraph 9.27 of the Commission’s guidance states that the attachment of a condition is: (1) Possible and (2) A matter for local authorities to decide. We hold the view that that the policy at 7.2 is not therefore in conflict with the Gambling Commission Guidance. We also hold the view that the policy at 7.2 already states that conditions will be necessary and proportionate and appropriate and does not therefore require amendment.
|
Acknowledged and notified |
|
2 |
Havenstreet and Ashey Parish Council |
The list of
consultees could have been wider, to include some of the large event
organisers on the The policy was
not particularly reader friendly, and could have been clearer. Express concern over the fact that parish council’s are not consultees in applications to the Isle of Wight Council for Gambling Licences. |
Noted Noted Parish Councils are included as interested parties and may comment on an application |
Acknowledged |