Councils won’t be able to block betting shops | Gambling

In your report (Burnham to give councils more powers to block vape and betting shops, 10 August) Angela Rayner is quoted as saying: “We’re giving local leaders the power to say no to what doesn’t belong on their high street, and the tools to fix it themselves”. If only.

The national scheme of delegation, due to come into force on 31 October, will take away the ability from council leaders and planning committees to determine most planning applications, including the change of use proposed here. Instead, they will be delegated to officers. Elected members and parish councils will lose the power to call controversial planning applications to committee. It’s not too late to reverse this decision, which is contrary to the government’s newfound enthusiasm for delegating decisions to local communities.
Roger Cornwell
Durham

The notion that betting shops are proliferating like weeds is a myth – their number has fallen by more than a third since 2019. Betting shops are well-regulated enterprises that contribute to the exchequer and serve as centres of local sociability (something I thought our new prime minister was in favour of).

Of course, there is problem gambling, but there is also problem drinking, which you don’t solve by closing down pubs. And the more you clobber legal high-street betting, the more you fuel online illegal gambling. This ill-informed nanny-state posturing makes no sense.
Alan Knight
Oxford

Regarding the article by Dawn Butler (To all the betting shops littering our high streets: people power is coming and the odds are against you, 11 August), as a borough councillor for the city centre in Chester, I was horrified to see an application for a slots outlet on one of the main shopping streets in the city. The location was opposite a shop called Smiggle, which sells backpacks and other paraphernalia for children and is on a main walking route to at least three schools. It is right next to the main nightclub in the city and overlapping opening hours were proposed. It is also an area frequented by students, many of whom are known to gamble in an attempt to stretch their meagre resources.

The only available grounds for refusal was protection of children and vulnerable people. I had a strong case, backed up by help from Butler’s campaign, plus many protests submitted by nearby landlords, resident groups, schools, the university and other concerned individuals.

Despite heartfelt pleas and what I thought was a basic common-sense argument, the panel of three councillors advised by licensing officers approved it. I went home and cried.

Thank you, Andy Burnham. It’s too late for this, but in future this would never make it through planning, let alone get a licence.
Katrina Kerr
Chester