SBC News Voice of the Sports Betting Industry
UK gaming venues remain in crisis as DCMS has no plans to implement machine ratio reforms needed for modernisation.
Though unconfirmed, it appears that the government will shelve plans to modernise the rules and offerings of Adult Gaming Centres (AGCs) on UK high streets.
DCMS has stalled plans to reconsider the relaxation of rules around B3 Gaming Machines allowed in AGC and Bingo venues as a recommendation of the Gambling Review’s White Paper consultation phase.
This morning, The Guardian reported on a letter confirming that “DCMS officials will not be introducing changes to the 80/20 rule this year”.
The 80/20 rule refers to ratio of gaming machines (category C, D and B) allowed in AGCs and bingo halls, a command that has been applied since 2011, implemented by reforms to the Gambling Act of 2005.
At present, AGCs and bingo halls can maintain no more than 20% of premise floor space for B3 gaming machines, which allow customers to stake a maximum of £2 with a maximum prize of £500. The remaining allocation is reserved for Category C or D machines, which provide lower stakes of £1 and 10p, and prizes of £100 and £10 respectively.
The recommendation to review the Gaming Machines formed part of feedback on the government’s modernisation of ARC premises, including the use of cashless payments, age-limit verifications and new licensing applications for individual gambling categories.
Reforms modernising venues were deemed essential for the post COVID-19 recovery of smaller gambling operators on the highstreet, and for communities relying on tourism and hospitality.
Local Coalition against Gaming Machines
The government’s decision to step back from reform comes against the backdrop of rising pressure from local authorities, who are becoming increasingly vocal in demanding for a more active role in shaping gambling policy.
Brent Council, supported by 38 other local governments and two mayors, including Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester, has called on Westminster to empower local areas with greater control over the spread of betting shops and gaming venues.
Citing concerns over “gambling harm hotspots” across Britain’s high streets, the coalition is urging a suite of reforms aimed at rebalancing the power dynamics between communities and operators.
These include proposals to consider household debt levels in planning applications, restrict the proximity of gambling premises to schools, and give local councils the ability to reject licences that pose risks to public welfare.
Speaking on behalf of the coalition, Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt, said: “There’s too much on the line to ignore the harms of betting shops on Britain’s high streets, but our hands are effectively tied by a law no longer fit for purpose.”
Gambling Act White Paper: reform, but not enough?
The White Paper, published in 2023 following a lengthy two-and-a-half-year review of the 2005 Gambling Act, was broadly welcomed for introducing long-awaited controls in the digital gambling sphere — including a £2 stake limit on online slot games and new affordability checks.
However, its treatment of land-based venues left many stakeholders side-lined with regards to modernising venues. To achieve parity between land-based and online gambling, DCMS was asked to consider three options on gaming machines allowance, the proposals included:
- Option one: Adjusting the ratio to 50/50, allowing an equal number of Category B and Category C/D machines.
- Option two: Implementing a 50/50 ratio with additional requirements that Category C/D machines be of similar size and accessibility as Category B machines.
- Option three: Removing the ratio entirely, giving operators full discretion over machine composition.
While it proposed modest reforms for AGCs, such as a potential relaxation of the 80/20 rule and changes to machine entitlements, these now appear to be indefinitely paused.
Critics argue that the delay reflects not only a regulatory inertia, but also the challenges of balancing industry interests with public health concerns and the shifting expectations of local constituencies.
According to Professor Heather Wardle, a gambling policy expert at the University of Glasgow: “The way the legislation is currently framed does not support local authorities. It’s a systemic power imbalance between councils and operators.”
British Arcades in despair
John Bollom, President of arcade trade body Bacta, voiced his disappointment over the government’s decision to delay changes to machine ratios. However, he reaffirmed the organisation’s commitment to continue lobbying on behalf of its members.
“I’ve spoken with several members about the discouraging news that reforms to machine ratios won’t be progressing this year,” he said.
“Like many across the sector, I share their frustration. But rest assured — Bacta remains resolute in challenging the anti-gambling rhetoric that misrepresents our industry with misinformation and prejudice.”
Bollom also extended an invitation to Gambling Minister Baroness Twycross to visit an Adult Gaming Centre, encouraging her to see first-hand how operators are promoting responsible gambling on the ground.
“Our venue staff foster relationships with regular patrons, many of whom view AGCs as important community hubs — a place to socialise, unwind, and enjoy free refreshments in a safe and welcoming setting,” he told the Minister.
Another Westminster’s balancing act
The Labour government has stated its commitment to fully implementing the White Paper’s recommendations. However, with local councils and public health advocates demanding more, it may soon be pressured to go beyond what the DCMS has proposed so far.
Among other demands are the introduction of a statutory levy to fund gambling harm prevention and the ability for local authorities to ban gambling advertising in their jurisdictions — a sharp departure from current national advertising rules governed by the Gambling Commission.
There are also calls to revisit spin speed and stake limits on B3 machines, potentially aligning them more closely with their online equivalents. For land-based operators, already facing mounting operational costs and digital disruption, the risk is that regulation may swing from stagnation to overcorrection.
