DOCSLIB.ORG

(Geographical Distribution of Casino Premises Licences) Order 2007

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
(Geographical Distribution of Casino Premises Licences) Order 2007 HOUSE OF LORDS Merits of Statutory Instruments Committee 13th Report of Session 2006-07 Drawing special attention to: Draft Gambling (Geographical Distribution of Casino Premises Licences) Order 2007 Volume I: Report and oral evidence (Written evidence published separately as HL Paper 67–II) Ordered to be printed 13 March and published 20 March 2007 London : The Stationery Office Limited £price HL Paper 67–I The Select Committee on the Merits of Statutory Instruments The Committee has the following terms of reference: (1) The Committee shall, subject to the exceptions in paragraph (2), consider— (a) every instrument (whether or not a statutory instrument), or draft of an instrument, which is laid before each House of Parliament and upon which proceedings may be, or might have been, taken in either House of Parliament under an Act of Parliament; (b) every proposal which is in the form of a draft of such an instrument and is laid before each House of Parliament under an Act of Parliament, with a view to determining whether or not the special attention of the House should be drawn to it on any of the grounds specified in paragraph (3). (2) The exceptions are— (a) Orders in Council, and draft Orders in Council, under paragraph 1 of the Schedule to the Northern Ireland Act 2000; (b) remedial orders, and draft remedial orders, under section 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998; (c) draft orders (including draft subordinate provisions orders) under section 1 of the Regulatory Reform Act 2001, subordinate provisions orders under that Act and proposals in the form of a draft order under that Act; (d) Measures under the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act 1919 and instruments made, and drafts of instruments to be made, under them. (3) The grounds on which an instrument, draft or proposal may be drawn to the special attention of the House are— (a) that it is politically or legally important or gives rise to issues of public policy likely to be of interest to the House; (b) that it may be inappropriate in view of changed circumstances since the enactment of the parent Act; (c) that it may inappropriately implement European Union legislation; (d) that it may imperfectly achieve its policy objectives. (4) The Committee shall also consider such other general matters relating to the effective scrutiny of the merits of statutory instruments and arising from the performance of its functions under paragraphs (1) to (3) as the Committee considers appropriate, except matters within the orders of reference of the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments. Current Membership The Members of the Committee are: Baroness Adams of Craigielea Viscount Eccles Baroness Maddock Lord Armstrong of Ilminster Lord Filkin (Chairman) Baroness Thomas of Winchester Viscount Colville of Culross Lord James of Blackheath Lord Tunnicliffe Baroness Deech Lord Jopling Registered Interests Members’ registered interests may be examined in the online Register of Lords’ Interests at www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld/ldreg.htm. The Register may also be inspected in the House of Lords Record Office and is available for purchase from the Stationery Office. Publications The Committee’s Reports are published by the Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee are on the internet at: www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/merits.cfm Contacts If you have any queries about the Committee and its work, please contact the Clerk of the Merits of Statutory Instruments Committee, Delegated Legislation Office, House of Lords, London SW1A 0PW; telephone 020-7219 8821; facsimile 020-7219 2571; email [email protected]. The Committee’s website, www.parliament.uk, has guidance for the public on how to contact the Committee if you have a concern or opinion about any new item of secondary legislation. Thirteenth Report DRAFT GAMBLING (GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF CASINO PREMISES LICENCES) ORDER 2007 Summary: This draft Order was laid on 1 March and permits the 17 local authorities set out in the Order to issue one premises licence each in the specific casino category allocated to them (regional, large or small). We took evidence to clarify how and why the Government had set the selection criteria for the Panel and how the Panel measured the bids against those criteria. The evidence demonstrated a difference in interpretation of “social impact”, with the Panel’s interpretation giving greater prominence to economic factors and less to the minimisation of harm from gambling, a licensing objective set by section 1 of the Gambling Act 2005. Each licence can only be issued after the authority has held an open competition for proposals and once the winner has obtained planning permission and the other necessary licences. The Government deliberately set the “best possible test of social impact” as the primary objective in the Panel’s terms of reference. We heard in evidence that the Panel gave great weight to the traceability of social impact and this significantly affected its recommendations, ruling out some locations where it felt it might be more difficult to trace the impact. The regional casino may not however be located in the same location within the licensing authority as proposed in the bid to the Panel (and thus where the Panel considered the best possible test of social impact could be assessed) because the next stage of the process requires an open competition amongst potential operators and each successful authority may award the licence to any site within its area. The draft Order will be debated in the Lords on 28 March. This Order is drawn to the special attention of the House on the ground that it gives rise to issues of public policy likely to be of interest to the House and may imperfectly achieve its policy objectives. 1. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) have laid this Order under sections 175 and 355 of the Gambling Act 2005 (“the Act”) together with an Explanatory Memorandum (EM) and Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA). Purpose of the Order 2. The draft Order permits the 17 selected licensing authorities to issue one premises licence each in the specific casino category allocated to them (regional, large or small). Each licence can only be issued after the authority has held an open competition for proposals (in compliance with Part 8 of and Schedule 9 to the Act) and once the winner has obtained planning permission and the other necessary licences. The draft Order will be debated in the Lords on 28 March. 2 MERITS OF STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS COMMITTEE Background 3. Such was the concern in both Houses over the potential impact of regional casinos that a Joint Committee was convened specifically to consider “the definition, location and economic and other implications of the largest casinos”. Its report, published on 22 July 2004, made a number of recommendations, including that to minimise any increase in problem gambling due to proximity to a casino, the largest casinos should be located away from residential areas and town centres1. As originally presented, the Gambling Bill proposed to leave the number of casino licences to market forces but this was unacceptable to the House of Commons: the bill was amended in Standing Committee to permit eight of each type of casino, so that the impact of an expansion in gambling could be tested. It was at this stage (16 December 2004) that the Government issued their Statement of National Policy (printed at Appendix 1 to this Report). 4. When the Bill was brought to the Lords in January 2005, this House shared the concern that the impact of the change should be properly piloted before many licences were issued. In the run up to the dissolution of Parliament, the bill was amended to reduce the first batch of licences to one regional casino, eight large and eight small and, with that limitation, the Act gained Royal Assent on 7 April 2005. The geographical distribution of the available licences is to be determined by the Secretary of State by Order subject to the affirmative procedure, and that Order is the subject of this Report. 5. The Government appointed the Casino Advisory Panel on 1 October 2005 to advise them on which of the bidding local authorities should be given permission to issue which sort of licence (the Panel’s terms of reference are printed at Appendix 2 to this Report). The Panel issued a call for bids on 31 January 2006. They published a provisional shortlist on 24 May 2006 and there was then some confusion over the process and appeals: supplementary submissions were allowed until 14 August. The shortlisted applicants for a regional casino licence were each then invited to an Examination in Public to discuss their bid and to allow other interested parties to be represented. The Final Report from the Casino Advisory Panel (“the Panel’s Report”), which listed the recommended local authorities for each type of licence, was published on 30 January 20072. Having consulted the Scottish Ministers and the National Assembly for Wales, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport laid the draft Order on 1 March 2007, endorsing the locations recommended by the Casino Advisory Panel without modification (Q77). Our approach 6. The draft instrument is short, simply listing the chosen licensing authorities, but the recommendations have been the subject of considerable controversy. To inform our scrutiny and to help the House make a better informed decision when it is asked to approve the draft Order on 28 March, we decided to take oral evidence from Professor Stephen Crow CB, Chairman of the Casino Advisory Panel and Rt Hon. Richard Caborn MP, Minister of State at DCMS (Appendix 5). We wanted to clarify how and why the 1 Session 2003-04, HL Paper 146, paragraphs 68-9 and 82-85.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Panel Report Examination in Public Regional Spatial Strategy for The
    Regional Spatial Strategy for the North East Examination in Public March – April 2006 Panel Report July 2006 Regional Spatial Strategy for the North East Examination in Public March – April 2006 Report of the Panel July 2006 REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY CONTENTS FOR THE NORTH EAST Contents CHAPTER Page PREFACE i 1 PANEL OVERVIEW AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 2 RSS VISION AND STRATEGY 13 3 SPATIAL STRATEGY 19 4 CITY REGIONS AND THE RURAL AREAS 27 5 ECONOMY 55 6 URBAN AND RURAL CENTRES & THE METRO CENTRE 73 7 HOUSING 79 8 THE ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 97 9 TRANSPORT STRATEGY 119 10 MONITORING AND IMPLEMENTATION 133 APPENDIX A TIMETABLE, MATTERS and PARTICIPANTS A1 APPENDIX B EXAMINATION LIBRARY DOCUMENTS B1 APPENDIX C RECOMMENDED RSS POLICY CHANGES i) INDEX TO THE SUBMISSION DRAFT POLICIES, THE PANEL’S MODIFICATIONS TO POLICIES AND NEW C1 POLICIES ii) POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF POPULATION C4 PROJECTIONS iii) NEW STUDIES - CITY REGION HOUSING MARKET C5 AREAS iv) PANEL’S MODIFICATIONS TO POLICIES AND NEW C7 POLICIES APPENDIX D SUMMARY of PANEL RECOMMENDATIONS D1 APPENDIX E GLOSSARY E1 PANEL REPORT REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY FOR THE NORTH EAST PANEL REPORT REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY PREFACE FOR THE NORTH EAST Preface i. The Regional Spatial Strategy for the North East Submission Draft (June 2005) covers the period to 2021 and is intended to replace the existing Regional Planning Guidance for the North East. Throughout this Report ‘the Submission Draft’ has been used to refer to the Submission Draft Regional Spatial Strategy for the North East (June 2005) and ‘the RSS’ to refer to the final Regional Spatial Strategy and its successors.
    [Show full text]
  • “Gaming UK: How Prepared Is Manchester (UK) for Vegas-Style Supercasinos?”
    “Gaming UK: How prepared is Manchester (UK) for Vegas-style supercasinos?” AUTHORS Nnamdi O. Madichie ARTICLE INFO Nnamdi O. Madichie (2007). Gaming UK: How prepared is Manchester (UK) for Vegas-style supercasinos?. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 5(3-1) RELEASED ON Friday, 05 October 2007 JOURNAL "Problems and Perspectives in Management" FOUNDER LLC “Consulting Publishing Company “Business Perspectives” NUMBER OF REFERENCES NUMBER OF FIGURES NUMBER OF TABLES 0 0 0 © The author(s) 2021. This publication is an open access article. businessperspectives.org Problems and Perspectives in Management / Volume 5, Issue 3, 2007 (continued) Gaming UK: How Prepared is Manchester (UK) for Vegas-Style Supercasinos? Nnamdi O. Madichie* Abstract Casinos provide a remedy for desperately declining cities, and the case of Atlantic City, New Jersey provides one critical illustration of this. It was the only state other than Nevada to have legalized ca- sino gambling in the late 1970s when the state looked to the casino hotel industry to invest capital, create jobs, pay taxes, and attract tourists and thus revitalise the economy as well as create a sound financial environment for urban redevelopment. It has also notably been linked with making cities vibrant places to visit and as an opportunity to become world class cities. Cities in Austria and Aus- tralia (including Brisbane, Canberra, Melbourne, and Sydney) have also towed a similar line and watched as their respective cities have been regenerated – thus making the supercasinos a contender for unparalleled economic engine – given the proper timing and market location. However this new wave of the entrepreneurial state, in its attempts to reimage the city through such measures as casi- nos, seems to have lessened the degree of public participation in the planning process.
    [Show full text]
  • Casinos and Regeneration: the Story So Far
    CASINOS AND REGENERATION: THE STORY SO FAR C4C BRIEFING NOTE Ben Harrison 15 February 2007 On 30 January 2007 the Independent Casino Advisory Panel announced that the city of Manchester would host the UK’s first supercasino. The city came from behind to beat the frontrunners, Blackpool and Greenwich. This note deconstructs the decision, before critically assessing the relationship between casinos and regeneration more generally. It focuses on the regeneration issues around supercasino development. It concludes with some lessons for Manchester. Key points: • The 2005 Gambling Act modernises the UK’s gambling laws. It provides new regulations for internet gambling, and allows for a new generation of big casinos across the UK: for one supercasino, eight large, and eight small casinos. • Cities and central government are interested in the potential for ‘casino-led urban regeneration’. This was a major factor in all of the supercasino bids. • The evidence on casino-led urban regeneration is relatively thin. It is a new and relatively untested approach for the UK. The Manchester supercasino is effectively a pilot. • Overall, big casinos appear to be a mixed blessing. Cities must guard against over- promising on what can be delivered, and be prepared for the potential downsides. • Upsides include the potential for casinos to create jobs and to boost tourism and existing leisure sectors. There may also be image benefits for the city, and multiplier effects on the wider local economy. • Downsides include increased problem gambling, mixed employment effects, displacement of existing businesses and spending, and damage to a city’s image. • There remains a real risk that the potential downsides might outweigh the upsides of the new supercasino.
    [Show full text]
  • AMB3046 Gambling Hbook 2010
    Gambling Act 2005 Councillors’ Handbook (England and Wales) Gambling Act 2005. England and Wales: Councillors’ Handbook Foreword Gambling is an increasingly acceptable Between us we have already made strides into leisure activity in modern Britain and a an effective system of co-regulation, and we wide range of gambling premises are a look forward to continuing to build common sight on most high streets, relationships with officials and councillors to seafronts and other entertainment ensure that we can, between us, keep gambling destinations. fair and safe for all. Since 2007 councils in England and Wales (as Brian Pomeroy, well as in Scotland) have taken on new statutory Chair, Gambling Commission duties as licensing authorities under the Gambling Act 2005. Councillors play a pivotal role in ensuring the Gambling businesses have a role in many effective implementation of the Gambling Act at communities across the UK - including a local level, whether as members of the seaside arcades, bingo clubs or licensing authority, or more generally in their bookmakers, where many try their luck roles as ward councillors within local on major sporting events like the Grand communities. National. These businesses are a source of local entertainment and provide This informative handbook includes practical employment and economic activity which case studies demonstrating how councils are help support other local businesses. using the legislation to support safer, healthier communities in which people and businesses No one wants to have establishments that put thrive. We hope you find it useful. vulnerable adults and children at risk or are a source of crime and disorder.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive 23 August 2006 Report from the Director of Policy And
    ITEM NO: 13 Executive 23rd August 2006 Report from the Director of Policy and Regeneration For Action Wards Affected: ALL Wembley Regeneration and the Casino Advisory Panel Forward Plan Ref: PRU-06/07-001 1.0 Summary 1.1 This report updates members of the Executive on progress relating to the potential for Brent to host a regional casino. It sets out developments since the last executive report, in March 2006, restates the findings of the independent economic and social impact assessments of a potential regional style casino at Wembley that were commissioned prior to this date, and summarises the results of the recent public consultation process. It asks members of the Executive to consider whether to continue to support a regional casino in the Borough. 1.2 If members continue to support a regional casino at this stage, it in no way commits the authority to hosting a casino. Rather it provides Brent with the opportunity to license such a facility. Throughout the Casino Advisory Panel process the Council will be able to articulate the terms on which it would be prepared to pursue the concept further, and subsequently if Brent is recommended by the Casino Advisory Panel as a preferred location then the Council would retain regulatory powers through both planning and licensing controls. No specific site has been identified and no preferred operators or developers have been chosen. 2.0 Recommendations 2.1 That in the light of the findings of the Economic and Social Impact assessments and the recent public consultation exercise, the Executive Meeting Version no.
    [Show full text]
  • International Sports Village
    CARDIFF COUNCIL CYNGOR CAERDYDD EXECUTIVE BUSINESS MEETING: 17 APRIL 2007 INTERNATIONAL SPORTS VILLAGE REPORT OF CORPORATE DIRECTOR AGENDA ITEM: 4 PORTFOLIO: CORPORATE Reason for this Report 1. This report is to seek the Executive’s approval of a competitive tender exercise in relation to disposal of the remaining part of the Sports Village retail site and to report recent progress at the site. Background 2. Phase 1 of the Sports Village development has been completed. The road infrastructure and utilities works are complete, and Morrisons and Toys R Us are trading. 50% of the receipt for the residential site has been received, with the balance due in April 2007, and the 50 metre pool is due for completion at the beginning of January 2008. Practical Completion for the temporary ice rink was achieved on 8 March 2007 and the temporary rink is fully operational, some snagging work to the temporary rink remains to be completed including repainting of the external walls which requires a period of continuous of dry weather. 3. Financial appraisals and construction programmes are being updated for Phase 2 of the development which includes the multi purpose arena, snow box, hotel, parking infrastructure and the Olympic standard canoe centre. Discussions have commenced between the Council and a potential operator in respect of the proposed new multi purpose Arena at the Sports Village. 4. Cardiff was contacted and asked to submit evidence by the Merits Committee of the House of Lords in respect of the debate in both Houses of Parliament concerning the Regional Casino, and a copy of Cardiff’s “Call for Evidence” submission to the House of Lords is attached as Appendix A.
    [Show full text]
  • Westminsterresearch
    WestminsterResearch http://www.westminster.ac.uk/research/westminsterresearch Gambling with regeneration: seaside resort regeneration and casino development James Morgan School of Architecture and the Built Environment This is an electronic version of a PhD thesis awarded by the University of Westminster. © The Author, 2013. This is an exact reproduction of the paper copy held by the University of Westminster library. The WestminsterResearch online digital archive at the University of Westminster aims to make the research output of the University available to a wider audience. Copyright and Moral Rights remain with the authors and/or copyright owners. Users are permitted to download and/or print one copy for non-commercial private study or research. Further distribution and any use of material from within this archive for profit-making enterprises or for commercial gain is strictly forbidden. Whilst further distribution of specific materials from within this archive is forbidden, you may freely distribute the URL of WestminsterResearch: (http://westminsterresearch.wmin.ac.uk/). In case of abuse or copyright appearing without permission e-mail [email protected] GAMBLING WITH REGENERATION: SEASIDE RESORT REGENERATION AND CASINO DEVELOPMENT JAMES MORGAN A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the University of Westminster for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy March 2013 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS For his patience, invaluable advice and constant supervision, Professor Peter Newman my Director of Studies has my greatest admiration and thanks. My supervisors, Professor Robert Maitland and Dr Adam Eldridge, who constantly offered their expertise, advice and time, are in my debt. My thanks also go to Brett Crane who has supported me throughout the whole process of researching and writing up my thesis.
    [Show full text]
  • Rank/Gala Appendices and Glossary
    APPENDIX A Terms of reference and conduct of the inquiry Terms of reference 1. On 20 August 2012, the OFT sent the following reference to the CC: 1. In exercise of its duty under section 33(1) of the Enterprise Act (‘the Act’) to make a reference to the Competition Commission (‘the CC’) in relation to an anticipated merger, the Office of Fair Trading, (‘the OFT’) believes that it is or may be the case that: (a) arrangements are in progress or contemplation which, if carried into effect, will result in the creation of a relevant merger situation in that: i. enterprises carried on by or under the control of the Rank Group PLC will cease to be distinct from enterprises carried on by or under the control of Gala Casinos Limited; and ii. the value of turnover in the UK of the enterprises acquired exceeds £70 million; and (b) the creation of that situation may be expected to result in a substantial lessening of competition within any market or markets in the UK for goods or services, including the supply of casino services (i) at a national level in the UK, and (ii) at a local level in the areas of Stockton-on-Tees, Aberdeen, Bristol, Cardiff, Stockport/Didsbury, Liverpool/New Brighton, Leeds, Edinburgh and Bradford. 2. Therefore, in exercise of its duty under section 33(1) of the Act, the OFT hereby refers to the CC, for investigation and report within a period ending on 3 February 2013, on the following questions in accordance with section 36(1) of the Act: (a) whether a relevant merger situation will be created; and (b) if so, whether the creation of that situation may be expected to result in a substantial lessening of competition within any market or markets in the UK for goods and services.
    [Show full text]
  • What Are the Costs and Benefits of Gambling in the United Kingdom?
    WHAT ARE THE COSTS AND BENEFITS OF GAMBLING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM? Yuliya Crane 1. Setting the Scene For a long time, the United Kingdom government considered replacing a very old and out of date Gambling Act, which dates back to 1968. Following the example of Australia where the Productivity Commission produced a substantial Gaming Report in 1999, analysing the present state of the industry, its externalities and future trends, the Department of Culture, Media and Sport commissioned a gambling review study, chaired by Sir Alan Budd in 2001. This report confirmed that the existing regulation was out of date and needed reviewing. The report suggested a considerable relaxation of laws governing the operations of casino gaming. The cross-industry group for gambling deregulation predicted that the number of Britons visiting a casino in any one year would have jumped from 3 per cent to 10 per cent (Ahmed and Mathiason, 2003) if the Budd proposals were implemented. The Department of Culture, Media and Sport published a response to Budd’s study, accepting the vast majority of its proposals. However, after a draft bill became public, there was a large wave of protests from anti-gambling organisa- tions. As a result, subsequent drafts of the bill proposed less and less change. The Draft Gambling Bill originally called for more than forty super-casinos, or as many as the market would bear, but that number was dropped to twenty during negotiations between Tessa Jowell, the Culture Secretary, and the Labour Party in 2004 and then lowered to eight in February 2005 (Smith, 2005).
    [Show full text]
  • Against the Odds…? Information About the Gambling Act 2005 and Problem Gambling
    Against the odds…? Information about the Gambling Act 2005 and problem gambling Contents 1. Gambling – The Facts Description. Problem gambling. Statistics. 2. Gambling Policy Government Policy. Internet gambling. Advertising. Casinos. Licensing Authorities. The Gambling Act. The Gambling Commission. 3. Industry Response Gambling Research, Education and Treatment Foundation. Responsible Gambling Strategy Board. Responsible Gambling Fund. Other Industry Involvement. 4. Types of Gambling Raffles / Tombolas. The National Lottery. Other Lotteries. Premium Bonds. Pools. Bingo. Betting on racing and sporting events. TV Shows. Gaming in Pubs and Clubs. Equal Chance Tournaments. Casinos. Gaming Machines. Fixed Odds Betting Terminals. Remote betting and gaming. Spread Betting. 5. Christian Reflections on Gambling and Problem Gambling 6. Christian Organisations’ Policies on Gambling Statements and policies. Rules on fundraising. Sources of further information. 7. Who else is involved? GamCare. Gordon House Association. Support groups. Regulators. Local authorities. Researchers. Campaigners. 8. What Can You Do? Personal conduct. Education. Licensing. Advertising. Support local treatment services. Become a counsellor. Get gambling on the political agenda. Pray. For some people, occasional gambling may be a part of their normal social activity. However, whilst many people enjoy a flutter or a bet from time to time, gambling can become addictive and cause many problems. Problem gambling impacts on the individual, their friends, family and colleagues, and on society. Financial pressures can build on people who have problems with their gambling so they are forced to borrow or steal more and more money. The ‘normalisation’ of gambling through public acceptance of the National Lottery and the increase in opportunities to gamble, especially through the internet, means that more and more people are likely to come into contact with gambling, and problem gambling.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Casino
    MANCHESTER CITY COUNCIL REPORT FOR RESOLUTION REPORT TO THE EXECUTIVE DATE 26th JULY 2006 SUBJECT REGIONAL CASINO REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE PURPOSE OF REPORT To update the Executive on the City Council’s submission to the Government’s independent Casino Advisory Panel for the ability to licence a regional casino. RECOMMENDATIONS The Executive is recommended to: 1. Note the contents of this report and welcome the Panel’s decision to shortlist Manchester’s bid as one of eight shortlisted locations for a single pilot regional casino. 2. Delegate to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Chair of the Executive and the Executive Member for Planning and the Environment, to agree the City Council’s next stage submission to the Government’s Independent Advisory Panel on Casinos. 3. Approve the approach for developing a social responsibility framework for casinos and other forms of gambling for report back to the Executive with detailed proposals later in the year. 4. Note that there is a report to the Executive elsewhere on this agenda on the implications of the Gambling Act 2005 for the City Council as licensing authority. FINANCIAL CONSEQUENCES FOR THE REVENUE BUDGET None from this report FINANCIAL CONSEQUENCES FOR THE CAPITAL BUDGET None from this report.. CONTACT OFFICERS Howard Bernstein Chief Executive 234 3006 [email protected] Tom Russell Chief Executive, New East Manchester 223 1155 [email protected] Jane Deane Project Director, New East Manchester 223 1155 [email protected] Ian McCormack New East Manchester 223 1155 [email protected] BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Blackpool's Seaside Heritage
    Blackpool’s Seaside Heritage Barcode to be placed here Blackpool’s Seaside Heritage Blackpool’s Seaside Heritage Allan Brodie and Matthew Whitfield Published by English Heritage, The Engine House, Fire Fly Avenue, Swindon SN2 2EH www.english-heritage.org.uk English Heritage is the Government’s statutory adviser on all aspects of the historic environment. Front cover © English Heritage 2014 In recent years Blackpool’s seafront has been widened, new trams have Images (except as otherwise shown) © English Heritage or © Crown copyright. EH. been created and giant dune grass sculptures sway in the wind. The Figs 12 and 42 are © and database right Crown Copyright and Landmark Information Group Ltd iconic Tower is in the middle of a (All rights reserved 2014). Licence numbers 00394 and TP0024. lengthy restoration programme. [DP154540] First published 2014 Inside front cover They Shoot Horses Don’t They?, ISBN 978-1-84802-110-5 the world’s largest mirrorball, Product code 51673 was designed by the artist Michael Trainor and was placed on the new sea defences near the Pleasure Beach British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data in 2002. A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. [AA053279] All rights reserved Acknowledgements page No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or Detail from panelling in refereshment mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, without room in the Opera House at the permission in writing from the publisher. Winter Gardens. [DP117396] Application for the reproduction of images should be made to English Heritage.
    [Show full text]