Supercasino 'not a problem'

David Ottewell

September 12, 2007

| Submit Comments | Comments (16) | Previous | Next

A SUPERCASINO in Manchester would not lead to an explosion of problem gambling and should go ahead, a major study will claim today.

The document will find `little evidence' that the £265m development - earmarked for east Manchester but set to be scrapped after an apparent u-turn by Gordon Brown - would `significantly' increase the number of gambling addicts.

It will identify the `real danger' of increased addiction as lying in the huge increase in internet betting and not in the supercasino - which it will identify as potentially the most tightly regulated form of betting in Britain.

The report has been drawn up by Paul Bellringer, the founder of gambling information charity GamCare, and Prof. Mark Griffiths, of the International Gaming Research Unit at Nottingham Trent University.

It was commissioned by the council as it steps up its bid to save the supercasino despite sources close to the prime minister describing it as `dead in the water'.

The project was thrown into doubt when the House of Lords rejected a package of casinos - including the supercasino - by three votes.

The council has continued to press its case, pointing out that the development would create 3,500 jobs and include a raft of leisure and sporting facilities for a deprived community.

The new report is expected to point out that Manchester's plans for a new Responsible Gambling Unit would keep a close eye on the supercasino and make it almost impossible for problem gambling to go unchecked.

Mr Bellringer said that available evidence simply did not support claims that the supercasino would be responsible for large amounts of gambling addiction.

He said: "It is not so much that the government is looking the wrong way, but they are creating a storm in a teacup by focusing on this one casino.

"It is a casino which would have a searchlight thrown on it by the government and media.

"The trouble with the internet is that it remains a bit like the Wild West out there."

GamCare describes itself as neither pro or anti-gambling, but rather is committed to studying the impact of betting.

| Submit Comments | Comments (16) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 16 and replies | View All

Mr Angry, Bury (12/09/2007 at 10:49)

I really cannot believe where these people are coming from. Who benefits?? Yes, you've guessed it, the usual gang.. developers, the council,etc with the unpleasant addition of the kind of people who have short cropped hair, wear two tone shoes,lots of bling, walk around with their coats draped over their shoulders and drive black Range Rovers with blacked out windows. need I say more?? The fact that this has been promoted by a LABOUR government really maked me seethe, why can't we have job creation schemes which are useful and beneficial?? expand public services and manufacturing, instead of closing down the Remploy factories. I REALLY AM GETTING SO ANNOYED NOW I FEEL LIKE THROWING THE COMPUTER OUT OF THE WINDOW!!!!

ace, manchester (12/09/2007 at 12:00)

Well the people who have said that it will not lead to gambling problems should put their money where their mouths are and put a few hundred thousand pounds of their own money down in a bank account and if they are right after five years they get their money back if not they loose it.

ace, manchester (12/09/2007 at 12:04)

Mr Angry, Bury
This MCC and its leaders are a sick lot they will do anything to get this casino built.We need to get this lot out of power .the leader of this council dickie leese needs throwing out of power. they disgust me how they keep going on about congestion charge and the casino .they will do anything and say anything to get their own way....Casinos bring problems end of story they bring low level jobs end of story..we dont want or need a casino .when will the council understand this.

ace, manchester (12/09/2007 at 12:06)

Mr Angry, Bury
I wonder who the developers will be ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????And who will the designers be.???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????And who will be advising on the project.???????????????????????????????????????????????I wonder whos going to make out of this.???????????????????????????????????????????????????Make your own minds up.

Gary SK13 (12/09/2007 at 13:08)

Mr Angry, if you had been to a supercasino like they have in the states you would know that the type of people you describe have nothing to do with the casinos. They are run above board and keep out 'louts', you are comparing it to the seedy joints we currently have. Lets move on, its called progress or change, something the average british person fears. Just take a look at the uproar over the 24 hour drinking and then the smoking ban, has the break down in society happened like a few were suggesting? - no, change happens and people live with it.

Mr Angry, Bury (12/09/2007 at 14:45)

Gary, in my experience, change is usually for the worse and that is why people fear it.It is very rarely to benefit anyone other than who does the changing. 24 hour drinking no problems eh? what planet are you on, look at the increase in problem binge drinking. Ace is right - MCC suck, casinos suck, end of

CJJ, Sportcity (12/09/2007 at 15:11)

Finally, a report that shows some common sense on an issue that has seen so much irrational and misunderstood opinion.

The Supercasino will create thousands of jobs and provide many facilities in East Manchester all at no cost to the taxpayer. The proposed water theme park will provide great entertainment for the area’s children and the proposed bars, restaurants and entertainment arena will provide leisure facilities that are currently sadly lacking in this part of the City.

The Supercasino itself will provide a great night out if approached sensibly. I do not understand why the Supercasino should be targeted with so much vitriol when the other 16 Regional Casinos are perfectly acceptable. As a show piece of large casinos I am sure that problem addicted gamblers would be helped much more so than in any other form of betting in this country.

Finally, in the time that it’s taken me to write this comment, I could have gone online and emptied my bank account on the 2.35 Handicap at Haydock Park. So why all the fuss about the Supercasino?

Can we now please start seeing some common sense from the policy makers in this country.

SamV, Manchester (12/09/2007 at 15:17)

I bet you £5 it doesn't lead to gambling problems.

LookingForLogic, Stockport (12/09/2007 at 23:35)

I wonder who they included in their study? I bet it wasn't all the fathers in Manchester who can't pay for their kids because their habit comes first.

Mr Angry, Bury (13/09/2007 at 07:59)

CJJ Sportcity, have you swallowed one of those fatuous glossy brochures full of spin and PR hype that property companies, the council and unelected quangos like regional development agencies spew out?

Steven (13/09/2007 at 10:03)

I always find it better to research a subject and find out the facts before I make a judgement. I was recently in conversation with one of the companies bidding for the super casino. Their plans where impressive. Their conservative projections estimated an additional 10 million visitors per year to the city. You see the casino was only a very very small part of the plan. 1% of the overall foot print. They would create 40,000 jobs (all above the national minimum wage). They would have sourced all products and services locally. They would have spent over £5million of their own money on the surrounding infrastructure (not on the complex itself).
They now plan to do the same thing in an other country in Europe.
I know if I had opposed the casino on the basis of a knee jerk reaction to the Daily Mails “Middle England be scared” rhetoric I would be feeling quite silly now.
As an aside 3% of the UK population visit Casinos. Of them 0.1% have a gambling problem.
Casinos have a well established and strong responsibility programme that works very well. Every member is registered it is impossible to enter a casino if you are underage. Now compare that to Bookies, Horse/Dog tracks and internet gambling and I think now is the time to admit to yourself that Casino are not the dens of iniquity that the right wing press claims. After all we have had gambling in this country for quite a substantial time and yet our society has not yet collapsed. Strange that?

CJJ, Sportcity (13/09/2007 at 10:56)

Ok Mr Angry from Bury, I’ll bite. Let’s examine your argument against the Supercasino.

“who benefits?”
“developers” – Nothing wrong with that. A new development will in the short term provide plenty of construction jobs for East Manchester.
“the council” – Again, what is wrong with the council benefiting? If they can raise any money from the Supercasino complex then this can either lead to a reduction in local taxes or an increase in other services.
“the unpleasant addition of people who have short cropped hair , wear two tone shoes, lots of bling, walk around with their coats draped over their shoulders and drive black Range Rovers with blacked out windows.” – I trust the point you are making here is that you believe the supercasino will become a centre for crime. With the supercasino acting as the showcase for large casinos in the UK, this prospect is not going to happen. The large casinos in the States, for instance, are professionally managed, well policed and no longer associated with crime and drugs.
“why can’t we have job creation schemes which are useful and beneficial” – Do not forget that the supercasino scheme will be entirely funded by private companies with no money from the taxpayer. This will create thousands of jobs for the residents of East Manchester. Job creation schemes are great but do rely on taxpayer money and they can still progress as a separate issue.
“Expand public services and manufacturing” – Tax payers money again.

The proposed site in Beswick is empty, looking rather desolate, albeit recently occupied by a bunch of travellers, and is ready for redevelopment. The supercasino complex can only have a positive impact on this part of East Manchester.

Steven (13/09/2007 at 12:06)

Mr Angry, have you ever visited a casino? Have you actually looked into the proposals? Do you even have the faintest idea of what you are talking about?

If so what are the elements of it that you resent?
If not well then your comments are irrelevant as they are based not on fact or expertise but merely on ignorance.

If you offer a valid point then I am happy to accept it but at the moment it appears to me that you are simply regurgitating inaccurate information you have probably heard from some bloke in a pub who once half read a tabloid headline.

Casinos have existed in the UK for over 40 years. They are safe environments. Everyone there is a member so there si no crime, no violence and no hassle.

We have the most rigorous and draconian casino regulations in the world.
Each casino has sophisticated surveillance equipment to prevent money laundering. This also ads to the safety of the guests.
Crime is not and has not been associated with Casinos in the UK.

I have demonstrated that Casinos do not = Crime
That no Government or tax payer money is being spent
That the investment, job creation opportunities are huge and that successful safe guards are in place to help with Problem gambling (remember 0.1% or 3%.

Thus I need to ask again what the actual basis of your argument is?

Gary SK13 (13/09/2007 at 13:17)

Mr Angry, I believe the other well founded comments on here back up my points about the casino, ace, the usual anti establishment comments, jumping on the bandwagon at any oppurtunity to attack the council ( i see you are against the latest tower development in picaddily) do you think we should go back to living in slums with outside toilets?.
Back to Mr Angry, your comments about 24 hour drinking- binge drinking has always existed, it was caused by people trying to drink as much as possible before closing time, to suggest it has been caused by the relaxing of the law is ridiculous.

Mr Angry, Bury (13/09/2007 at 15:10)

CJJ, I don't mind taxpayers money going on worthwhile things. You even admit that the jobs are short term, nuff said.This is yet another get rich quick scheme designed to hoover money out of the pockets of those who don't have much to start with and into those of the greedy and rich

The Catcher, In The Rye (13/09/2007 at 15:34)

I'm looking forward to the casino coming. Me and Mrs Catcher can have many a good night - meal at the new Thai on Lord North Street then a stroll along the rural byeway of Hulme Hall Lane,past the gas works, popping into the Asda for some expensive looking cigars and then while away the hours at the roulette table. Then, perhaps weighed down with our winnings, or thoughts of our losses, heading homeward up Briscoe Lane in the early light, tossing coins to the beggars of East Manchester. Bring it on.

()

Report

News