Should the trade conduct its own study into AWP machines?

The trade should commission its own study into AWP machines

by David Clifton, one of thePublican.com's legal team of experts from London solicitors firm Joelson Wilson​

In an earlier piece posted on thePublican.com in July of this year, The Gambling Review Report - The Essential Guide, I wrote about the recommendations of the Gambling Review Body contained in the Budd Report, published earlier that same month.

In that article I explained that, in relation to gaming by machines, it was recommended that:

• the maximum stake for all-cash AWP machines (as installed in pubs) should be increased from 30p to 50p and the maximum prize should be increased from £15 to £25 with further increases only to be in line with inflation as and when agreed with the Gambling Commission
• no more than two AWP machines should be allowed in pubs (unless they were entitled to more than two as at July17 2001).

Not surprisingly, these recommendations were met with dismay by the pub trade. Underlying all that was said in the Budd Report is the principle that commercial gambling should be confined to premises which are specifically licensed for gambling and where that is their main purpose.

This issue has been hitting the headlines in recent weeks with the British Beer and Pub Association expressing the view that the recommendations will cost the trade £43m each year and will lead to some pubs closing. (See AWP limits could lose industry £43m (8 November 2001)for full details).

Many observers have also commented that insufficient research in this area has been conducted.

The authors of the Budd Report say that they have relied on research indicating that:

• people may gamble more than they intend and take more risks when they mix alcohol and gambling
• gaming machines are potentially highly addictive and pose problems on a par with casino betting and gaming.

Research​

So what exactly does that research say? In a 1998 survey of 500 heavy drinkers in Birmingham, 24 per cent of men and nine per cent of women said "yes" to the question "In the last year while, or after, drinking, have you gambled more than you would normally have done?"

A US study of 4,000 adults in 1999 found that heavy alcohol use is often associated with increased spending on gambling and multiple gambling problems.

Research in New Zealand in 1998 found a link between acute alcohol intake and both increased duration of gambling and impaired control of gambling behaviour.

Research dating from 1992 and 1994 indicates that a "growing proportion" of individuals with gambling difficulties prefer to bet on gaming machines.

GamCare says that more than 50 per cent of calls to its helpline concern problem gambling on gaming machines.

However, no specific research on AWP machines has been referred to. There is a world of difference between jackpot machines, presently found only in casinos, bingo halls and clubs (with maximum prizes of £1,000, £500 and £250 respectively) and the all-cash AWP machines located in pubs.

Indeed, the report says that "there has been little research on problem gambling, either in general or in its varieties in this country" and goes on to acknowledge that it is difficult to draw precise parallels from studies of problem gambling in other countries.

So has there been sufficient research? The authors of the Budd Report choose to say that they are relying on the altogether more woolly "fundamental principles governing human behaviour" enabling them to "draw reasonable conclusions about the relevance of features which appear to cause problem gambling in other countries".

Conclusion​

So what is my conclusion? I must admit that I tend to agree with Brigit Simmonds, chief executive of Business in Sport & Leisure, who has complained that the Gambling Review Body has made these particular recommendations without doing its homework.

It may be that the pub industry should commission its own research to satisfy the Government that not only are AWP machines a universally accepted feature of the pub scene but at the stake and prize limits proposed, there is no chance of anyone heading for rapid financial ruin.