Super Casino for Manchester: A bad decision?

[Henry Mantell]

Tomorrow is the "High Noon" commons vote with Tessa Jowell taking on the House of Commons in an all or nothing approach to resolve the question of the super casino.
More importantly did you see the reaction of the Manchester City Council's "preferred operator" to last week's budget announcement of increased taxation on casino's? If not in summary they don't feel able to proceed as the chancellor has virtually eliminated their profit from gaming machines which is what draws the punters and gives them such large profit margins. Their margins from tables are probably insufficient to justify the investment.
With no firm decision on the Eastland's site, an operator indicating cold feet and Tessa Jowell taking on all comers, in the words of the song "There may be trouble ahead" but Tessa will get an answer tomorrow. Manchester CC may have to wait!
Coral island at Blackpool is also unhappy about the budget, maybe their opposition to the Blackpool bid on commercial reasons wasn't such a smart move after all?

[aidanorourke]

Thanks very much for alerting us to the 'High Noon' Commons vote, we will just have to see what happens! It won't make any difference to me, the person who went on a day trip from Hong Kong to the gambling haven of Macau, and managed to spend not one dollar on gambling, only on food and postcards!

[Henry Mantell]

Another interesting point about the commons vote following the budget imposition of a 50% tax on profits from the complex, is that Bullingdon Club member David Cameron overruled his shadow chancellor George Osborne and is forcing Tory MP's to oppose Labour's proposal.
Given the Conservative, Liberal Democrat and Labour backbench stated opposition the three line whip may have to become a bit heavy if tessa's dream is to come true.
Of course George Osbourne, MP for Tatton, has a shadow cabinet brief of "shadow minister for Manchester" so Cameron's knockback of his efforts to get the shadow cabinet (largely ex-Etonian) to back Manchester only to have a shadow cabinet meeting reversed might prove revealing in future.
One other comment the Lords committee investigating the Prof. Stephen Crow Casino Advisory panel recommendation has drawn 2 admissions from Crow:
1) that the panel were unaware and did not take into account the fact that 20% of the population of Manchester is in receipt of income support.
2) that the panel were minded to knock out any consideration of a "destination casino" i.e. Blackpool since the terms of reference"made it virtually impossible for [the Advisory panel] to recommend to the government that there should be a destination casino".
The Lord's Committee conclusion reads "The prime objective of the panel was to select the locations which provided the best possible test of social impact." It went on to say that this explained "the less obvious choices" for smaller casinos.
The Tory party support for smaller casinos was communicated to Jowell last Friday by Hugo Swire shadow Culture Secretary, but in the light of the Lord's Committee evidence and conclusions the Tories withdrew support for any vote on the Manchester decision. They argue that the single order approach by Jowell for one vote on both Super casino and smaller casinos is flawed, the Super casino should be referred to a cross party committee of MP's and peers for review in the light of Prof. Crow's evidence in committee.
As so far Jowell remains intent on one vote only, it could be interesting!
As a footnote how about the cost to taxpayers of all this? Well here is what Douglas McWilliams chief executive of the Centre for Economic and Business Research said of Jowell's six year effort to loosen legislation ongambling and casinos "From commission to the progress of the Gambling Bill and the work of the panel it has cost millions." Local Authorities all over Britain have spent millions in bidding for licences for super and mini casinos.
I have said before Tessa Jowell lacks judgement, but on this evidence she is also an expensive Minister to maintain. The Budget increase to 50% tax on gambling looks to have drawn a line under most operators willingness to enter casino operation and I can't see too much support for her amongst Labour colleagues.
As for Manchester it would be interesting to know how much Manchester has spent on the bid so far....in advance of the May Council elections!
"The[Lords]report proves that the cards were marked, the dice loaded and the roulette wheel rigged against Blackpool."
Time for a review by all party Committee? I think so.

[Hugh Jardin]

I am just being a bit thick as I just can't understand the demand for a "supercasino" in Manchester.

Are the casinos in Manchester overcrowded? Member waiting lists too long?

Is the lure of Gamblington going to attract thousands of out-of-town punters?

Or is it the lapse of the membership rule which are there to protect impulsive (ie drunk and stupid) gamblers? In which case the "supercasino" will be populated by drunk and stupid people who need protecting from themselves.

Manchester casinos are strange places. Me and my mate Phil used to come out of the Hacienda at 2am on Thursday nights looking for somewhere to go for a drink and end up in the Stanley Midland, sipping half a pint of lager, eating free sandwiches, drunkenly eying up the croupiers, whilst contemplating gambling our collective £4 taxi fare previously set aside, whilst surrounded by stonefaced Arabs and Chinamen waging huge wads.

[aidanorourke]

George Osbourne MP for Tatton is the "shadow minister for Manchester", now that's an interesting comment.

Thanks for the continuing views on the Super Casino issue.

The 'Noble Lords' have now rejected the government's plans for 17 new casinos, including the Super Casino in Manchester. More on the BBC News Website link below.

BBC NEWS | Politics | Ministers consider casino options

[Henry Mantell]

I can understand this not being widely known in Manchester, at my reckoning does Manchester have any Conservatives elected?
Yes it is an official duty of his within the shadow cabinet, I do have my sources! An aside but over half the shadow cabinet are ex Etonians, so comforting to know that the Shadow minister for Manchester is so close to the citizens! I imagine the thinking went along the lines that Tatton is nearest to Manchester but I'm guessing there!
Incidentally don't believe the"geriatric Lords" tag given to the revised(by Labour) upper house. Analysis of the vote in the Lord's shows that less than half the Labour Lords followed party line, and in that rarest of events a political intervention by the Archbishop of Canterbury, the cross bench peers, Lords spiritual and Tory and Liberal Democrat voted down the government statutory order.
Herein lies Tessa Jowell's problem. She introduced a statutory order, and this passed with a small Labour majority after a good deal of usual arm twisting and offers of a committee in the Commons, but failed in the Lords through lack of support by her own party members.
She now has two problems;
a policy locked in constitutional mess. Difficult to see how she can get anything together in remaining Commons time between post easter and summer recess.
Change of leadership pending with a different cabinet. Gordon Brown's budget has threatened her policy being implemented so the Brownites aren't going to help her out on the policy front. In fact she might find it difficult to get any cabinet backing on this one this year.
Of course she could consider resignation...return to backbenches and a long term attempt at rehabilitation. There is also the question of her estranged husband's appearance in Italy later this year to ponder.
There is always the London 2012 vision to hold on to. Oh dear she isn't too popular there either!
Manchester has still got a recommendation from the panel, isn't sure about the site, might not have an operator. However there is no rival for the supercasino but a lot of the population wondering why on earth we need a supercasino other than in a resort destination. Isn't Government in Britain wonderful? Meanwhile we have the Shadow cabinet...........

[aidanorourke]

Thanks very much for sharing that very useful and insightful information. Plenty to think about now, and the Super Casino issue is a major theme on the news today. It will be some time yet before the super casino arrives, wherever it's going to arrive...

[Phil Blinkhorn]

So much for British Democracy! A bunch of unelected, unrepresentative party grandees, the rump of the aristocracy left in the Lords by the government to appease traditionalists and some religious leaders who represent less than 20% of the churchgoing public, never mind the churchgoing public as a whole, (which is less than 50% of the population) throw out a decison made by an elected body.

The cost of the next few weeks of "rethinking" - anyone's guess.

Interesting to see the reaction of some Beswick residents on the BBC this lunchtime. None are likely to be punters but all expressed annoyance at the intervention.

I wonder what the odds are on the decison being permanently overturned in favour of................................................ .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .........well certainly not Blackpool but that redundant piece of modern construction that has already cost the country a wasted fortune........................................... .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ......................The Dome.

[Henry Mantell]

The House of Commons vote may have been by elected members but the Government relies on arm twisting for its majority. Clearly a lot of Labour Party members had their arms and other parts of anatomy twisted by the labour whips to produce a majority!
Although there is movement to make the Lords an elected second chamber don't hold your breath on that one. Leaving that to one side I do find it telling that it was a committee of the second chamber who received in evidence the admission that the terms of reference denied many local authorities(not only Blackpool) any real chance i.e. Labour party policy was from the outset framing panel recommendation in favour of an inner city area. I feel this was a hidden agenda at a cost to millions of community charge payers all over Britain. So unelected they may be but at least they uncovered something to enlighten the people who have been paying millions to fund Tessa Jowell's vision to expand gambling.
Tessa Jowell is elected but her agenda is deeply flawed, has cost millions and her inept decision to seek a statutory instrument was defeated by a section of her own party. If this issue had been addressed by a cross party committee in the first place and then a policy formulated a good deal of money would have been saved, legislation framed and approved.
Personally I think the notion of additional casinos is not what a majority of the electorate want, the somewhat grandiose idea of Supercasino is a Jowell folly. Sadly the electorate, especially in Manchester have been misled and are paying for being misled.
Perhaps people might consider this in the May elections!

[Phil Blinkhorn]

There is nothing new in flawed decisions and arm twisting being part of life in the Commons. It's been going on since the time of Charles I. Fortunately the breadth of the electorate has grown over the last 360 years but the UK is still left with an unelected, unrepresentative, unsackable second chamber which, from time to time, gets above itself and overturns the wishes of the Commons.

The limitations enacted in various Parliament Acts, all vociferously fought by their lordships, have failed in this and other instances to stop the will of the elected chamber being overturned.

You may not like Tessa Jowell but there have been dozens of ministerial policies proposed and carried through down the decades by governments of various hues that have cost far more money, have cost jobs rather than having the potential to create work and have proved to be far more disruptive, wasteful and deleterious - often needing extremely expensive rectification - than the siting of a number of casinos.

What is at stake here is far more important than the particular policy - it is the basis of democracy. Is the UK to be ruled by elected politicians who, for all their chicanery, double dealing and ways of forcing through policy are both elected and sacked by the people or is the Commons to continue to be overruled by an unelected, unrepresentative bunch of appointees, peppered with the rump of an inbred so called elite and a few very unrepresentative churchmen, a grouping not too far removed from the powerbase that ruled medieval England