BC681 – Gambling (Advertising and Sponsorship) Bill 2014 (CLASSIC BILL)

Watch
This discussion is closed.
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
This is a classic bill – it is a bill that was submitted originally in 2014, and has been posted again to encourage more debate. There will be the usual six days to debate it.

BC681 – Gambling (Advertising and Sponsorship) Bill 2014, originally submitted by the TSR Government (Lab/Soc/Grn)
[center]Image
Gambling (Advertising and Sponsorship) Bill 2014
An Act banning gambling advertising and sponsorship./center]

BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-

1: Definitions
(1) "Gambling" refers to the placing of money on the outcome of an event over which the gambler has no control, with the aim of winning more money if successful.
(2) “Advertisement” refers to any media of a print, audio, video or online nature intended to draw attention to or generate sales for a product.
(3) “Sponsorship” refers to the use of the name of a product in the name of something else, with the intention of drawing attention to a product.

2: Advertisements
(1) Advertisements for gambling are forbidden.
(2) All advertisements for gambling must be removed before the date of commencement of this Act.

3: Sponsorship
(1) Sponsorship by bookmakers and casinos is forbidden.
(2) No new sponsorship deals may be agreed upon after the date of commencement of this Act.
(3) Existing sponsorship deals may be seen out, but may not be renewed.

4: Exception
(1) Not-for-profit gambling events are exempt from the provisions of this Act.
(2) The National Lottery and the Health Lottery are exempt from the provisions of this Act.

5: Sanctions
(1) If licensed premises contravene this Act, the licence in question is to be annulled.
(2) If an individual contravenes this Act
a. for the first time, a fine not exceeding £2000 may be levied.
b. for a second time, a fine not exceeding £5000 and a prison sentence not exceeding 6 months may be levied.
(3) If a company contravenes this Act, a fine not exceeding 10% of their profit over the coming year may be levied.

6: Commencement, Short Title and Extent
(1) This Act may be cited as the Gambling Act 2014.
(2) This bill shall extend to the United Kingdom; and
(3) Shall come into force on the 1st of January 2015.
0
CatusStarbright
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
I see nothing wrong with the status quo.
0
SoggyCabbages
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#3
Report 2 years ago
#3
Why should the National Lottery be exempt from this? It's still the same as normal gambling.

Nayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
0
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 2 years ago
#4
The idea that people choosing to speculate with their own money is something that should be discouraged by the very same people who supported voting for people to spend moneu abusing their bodies with narcotics is absurd.

Gambling is not wrong and if anything restrictions should be removed.

As one of the original Libertarians used to say.. 'stop molesting business'.
0
CountBrandenburg
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#5
Report 2 years ago
#5
If I am to be frank, I forgot the Health Lottery was a thing before seeing this bill xD
No, I don’t see why we should be restricting an industry such as gambling in advertisement. Whilst I doubt anyone of use condones irresponsible gambling, this serves to hurt them more.
0
Eppeb
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 years ago
#6
No, the status quo is fine, and I do not believe gambling advertising does harm that would justify such a ban. If anything, I wouldn't be opposed to having a well-known casino chain like Sands or MGM open a casino resort in the UK to attract tourists and create jobs.
1
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#7
Report 2 years ago
#7
I see nothing wrong with the status quo. People will still choose to gamble regardless of if they see an advert or not.
0
ns_2
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#8
Report 2 years ago
#8
Like many have already stated, I see very little wrong with the status quo - we ought not to artificially restrict the industry - people ought to be free to choose how to spend their money.
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#9
Debate on this classic bill has concluded.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Should there be a new university admissions system that ditches predicted grades?

No, I think predicted grades should still be used to make offers (605)
33.84%
Yes, I like the idea of applying to uni after I received my grades (PQA) (749)
41.89%
Yes, I like the idea of receiving offers only after I receive my grades (PQO) (354)
19.8%
I think there is a better option than the ones suggested (let us know in the thread!) (80)
4.47%

Watched Threads

View All