Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Minister Resigns over delay to Fixed Odds Betting Terminals Changes

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    755
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 117 Times in 97 Posts

    Minister Resigns over delay to Fixed Odds Betting Terminals Changes

    Sports minister Tracey Crouch resigns over the government deciding to delay their decision to reduce the maximum stake on fixed odds betting terminals from 100 to 2.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46057548

    It's nice to see a politician actually sticking to a point of principle these days without (hopefully) an ulterior motive based on ambition and self publicity.

    It's a real scandal to see how the number of betting shops with these machines in them is inversely proportional to the amount of money the people in the area have - this is exploitation pure and simple.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Javert For This Useful Post:

    grumzed (02-11-2018)

  3. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Newport, South Wales
    Posts
    8,770
    Thanks
    1,361
    Thanked 1,095 Times in 909 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    As the bbc link says

    Who is Tracey Crouch?

    --
    "The Inland Revenue is not slow, and quite rightly, to take every advantage which is open to it under the Taxing Statutes for the purposes of depleting the taxpayer's pocket. And the taxpayer is in like manner entitled to be astute to prevent, so far as he honestly can, the depletion of his means by the Inland Revenue"

    Lord Clyde: "Ayrshire Pullman Motor Services V Inland Revenue, 1929"

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    London N16
    Posts
    4,995
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 518 Times in 434 Posts
    Sometimes governments show such stupidity. The idea of re-visiting fox hunting had to be junked when they minders told them it would be a vote loser. Now their pandering to the betting lobby will need to be rethought. Meanwhile they’ve lost a vote in crucial times. It makes one weep...
    The poster reserves the right to amend or completely change any opinions he has posted at any time...

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    1,552
    Thanks
    135
    Thanked 300 Times in 237 Posts
    Whilst I do not favour a nanny state, there is no doubt, at least for me, that there should be controls on companies that blatently profit from encouraging some people to effectively self-destruct. It is little different from having regulation about the free distribution of hard drugs and establishing legal limits to "pay-day lenders". It is not only the addicts that suffer but also their familes. In any case, it would mean that the rest of us do not have listen to their inane TV adverts when watching sporting events. It is admirable to see Ms Crouch take a stance here.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to grumzed For This Useful Post:

    Barry (02-11-2018), Major Sinic (03-11-2018)

  7. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    755
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 117 Times in 97 Posts
    Part of me thinks that we the government should somehow legistlate along the lines of being able to fine companies that exploit people who are on benefits - for example, allowing people who've just collected their benefit cheque to spend it all in 5 minutes in a machine and then have nothing to eat for 2 weeks. Why not make the companies doing this accountable for their actions somehow?

    This flies in the face of government policy though, which is to "teach" people how to manage their money and take their own responsibility.

    The problem is that their idea of teaching people this is to just let them make the mistake, then starve, and assume that if they survive to the next month, they will have learned their lesson. If parents took this attitude on their children their children wouldn't survive very long.

    In contrast in the US, they do attempt to do this - benefits are often constrained in various ways so that people can only spend them on certain items. This is obviously a controversial area because it involves the balance between free choice and allowing people to harm themselves and their dependents and local area.

    Bottom line is that it's clear that the UK taxpayer is basically funding the sprouting up of betting shops in poor areas all round the country, which in the end is not a desirable outcome.

  8. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    684
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 25 Times in 20 Posts
    If I chose to smoke and get lung cancer, it's my choice, if I chose to drink too much alcohol and kill my liver, it's my choice, and if I want to bet it's my choice. I hate the nanny government.

    PS I don't bet or smoke
    Keep Britain British, whoops, it's too late

Similar Threads

  1. Guto Bebb: MP resigns as minister over Brexit vote
    By stevectaylor in forum Political News
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 17-07-2018, 07:31 PM
  2. In/Out betting
    By Patman Post in forum Brexit
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-06-2016, 07:31 AM
  3. Ex-minister resigns Labour whip
    By stevectaylor in forum Political News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 20-10-2015, 12:37 AM
  4. Tory minister Brooks Newmark resigns
    By stevectaylor in forum Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 27-09-2014, 08:00 PM
  5. Labour wants fixed odds betting vote
    By stevectaylor in forum Political News
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-01-2014, 06:33 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •