Maximum stakes on fixed-odds betting terminals (FOBTs) should be cut from £100 to £2 in a bid to stem the harm caused by problem gambling, a cross-party panel of MPs has recommended.
The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on FOBTs said that the maximum amount a punter can stake on a single spin should be reduced on a "precautionary" basis until companies operating them are able to prove they do not cause harm to users, their families and communities.
The high-stake, high-speed electronic casino games have been branded "the crack cocaine of gambling" by campaigners who argue that they are dangerously addictive. The Government is currently carrying out a review of regulations governing them.
In its submission to the Department of Culture, Media and Sport review, the APPG said that it had received reports of increased levels of crime resulting from the presence of FOBTs in bookmakers and said that the Government should consider not only their impact on problem gamblers but the wider cumulative harm to families and neighbourhoods.
The group's chairwoman, Labour MP for Swansea East Carolyn Harris, said: "In this interim report we note that, from the evidence presented to us, the Government now has clear case for significantly reducing the £100 stake that can be wagered on a Fixed-Odds Betting Terminal.
"The group sees a strong case for the stake being set at £2. This call is supported by many Members of Parliament from all political parties and in both Houses of Parliament, it is also supported by a significant majority of the public.
"At the very least, the stake should be reduced on a FOBT on a precautionary basis. The precautionary principle should be applied until sufficient evidence is presented to the Government that the high stakes on these machines do not cause harm rather than the onus being to prove that they do cause harm.
"The Government has a duty to protect the most vulnerable in our society and to act in the public interest. We therefore strongly urge them to properly regulate FOBTs and to do so with immediate effect."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel