Finance (No. 3) Bill — House of Commons, 2018-11-20
Topic: Domestic Commerce
Richard James Shannon (Democratic Unionist Party, Right): I thank my hon. Friend for his wise intervention The Salvation Army also says: "Another man who became homeless as a result of his addiction and who was helped by the Salvation Army lost over £30,000 on gambling machines." I do not think that there is one Member in this Chamber who would not be able to recollect a story of this kind from their constituencies. It is the story of the man who plays on a FOBT machine on a Friday night and puts all his wages on it, before going home to his wife, who is looking for the money to buy the groceries, and their children. Those are the stories of real life; those are the stories of addiction; and those are the stories that we want to stop in this Chamber today That is why we are keen for the Government to implement as soon as practicable the proposed maximum stake limit of £2 for FOBTs. It is of some concern that in the Budget the timeframe for implementation was to have been delayed to October 2019. We note that some campaigners said it would be possible to implement it in April 2019 and that the Government have acceded to that. That apparent delay was deeply disappointing. The right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green referred to the amendment with over 100 Members’ names on it. What changed the Government’s opinion was those 100 names from across the Chamber. I am very pleased that we have achieved that change I agree with the change and I ask the Government simply to do the right thing. They seem to have been held to ransom by the gaming industry. Therefore, it should not have surprised me to see how the EU—I use this comparison; I am sure many Members will understand it—has held this proud nation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to ransom, and how our Government have capitulated at the cost not of £400 million, the estimated lost tax revenue, but £39 billion, and, most importantly, the sovereignty of Northern Ireland and the sanctity of the Union You may not believe that the two are linked, Dame Eleanor, but they are. You may not believe that that should be mentioned in this debate, but it has been. The Government’s decision making is as flawed here as it is in selling Northern Ireland and the backstop. Do the right thing, stop allowing gambling addictions to destroy families and protect people from themselves, in the same way that people must wear a seatbelt whether they want to or not. Step in and step up. I support the amendment and I look forward to working with hon. Members to do even more in this Chamber to address gambling addiction in the years to come Amendment 16 agreed to. Clause 61 Remote Gaming Duty: Rate Amendment made: 17, page 44, line 25, leave out "1 October 2019" and insert "1 April 2019".—(Gareth Johnson.) This amendment is consequential on Amendment 16. Clause 61, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 62 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Schedule 18 agreed to. New Clause 12 Review of public health effects of gaming provisions "(1) The Chancellor of the Exchequer must review the public health effects of the provisions of section 61 of and Schedule 18 to this Act and lay a report of that review before the House of Commons within six months of the passing of this Act (2) A review under this section must consider— (a) the effects of those provisions in reducing the negative public health effects of gambling, and (b) the implications for the public finances of the public health effects of— (i) those provisions, (ii) the operation of the law relating to remote gaming duty and gaming duty if those provisions were not given effect."—(Ronnie Cowan.) This new clause would require a review of the public health effects of gaming provisions. Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill. Clause 15 Offshore Receipts in Respect of Intangible Property Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.