MP warns on bet limit for bookies' machines
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Dramatically reducing the maximum bet gamblers can place on a single spin of high-stake, casino-style machines would result in a "murky" compromise with the big five bookmakers, a campaigning MP has argued.
Graham Jones has been Labour's most vocal MP on tackling the ill-effects of high-speed fixed-odds betting terminals, but said he was "not convinced" by the Campaign for Fairer Gambling's solution of capping stakes at £2.
Currently, punters can lose up to £300 a minute on the machines. He added he was "not quite on the same page" as the campaign, even though he was hosting the Parliamentary launch of the group's latest research yesterday.
Campaign consultant Adrian Parkinson insisted that the cap is the only way of reducing the harmful effects of the touchscreen machines, dubbed the "crack cocaine of gambling". The latest report claims that more than £1.6bn was lost on FOBTs in the UK last year, with typical gamblers in areas of particularly acute deprivation like Liverpool and Middlesbrough losing around £1,400 each.
However, Mr Jones said that focusing on the amount wagered would simply lead to "elongated" negotiations with the bookmakers, such as William Hill and Ladbrokes, that so dominate the market over a mere number.
Ultimately, time would be wasted on reaching a compromise between the £2 proposal and the £100 that players can gamble every 20 seconds. This would distract the focus from the central issue of addiction, the Labour MP for Hyndburn in Lancashire argued.
In a speech last year, Labour leader Ed Miliband said he would give councils the power to ban FOBTs from their high streets. Mr Jones said: "It's better to have zones [banning] FOBTs than long, drawn-out debates on whether the bets should be £20, £30, £10 or £2 – I can see that being a murky debate potentially."
The Coalition is examining a code of conduct proposed by the Association of British Bookmakers last week. This would let gamblers set their own limits on the amount of time and money they could lose on the machines, which have been lightly regulated but proved highly addictive.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments