Agenda item

Present:- Mr Tony Wollenberg and Mr Bill Fisher, Directors of Global Gaming Ventures Limited, represented by Counsel Miss Jessica Simor; Mr Michael Nuttall of Apollo Resorts and Leisure Limited and Mr Ewan McGregor of Gala Casinos Limited (observer only)

The Chair asked Mr Kolvin to comment on Councillor Rigby’s potential interest in the two applications to be discussed. Mr Kolvin said that he did not consider that Councillor Rigby’s involvement in a petition, against the proposed casino site in Walcot Street, constituted a prejudicial interest in relation to this item. The applicants and their representatives were asked whether they had any objection to Councillor Rigby participating in the determination of their applications. They confirmed that they had no objection.

The Environmental and Licensing Manager presented the report, following which the Committee RESOLVED that

having been satisfied that the public interest would be better served by not disclosing relevant information, the Committee resolves, in accordance with the provisions of Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, that the public be excluded from the meeting for this item because of the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act as amended.

The Committee considered whether Global Gaming Ventures (GGV) should be allowed to remain in the casino competition or be excluded because of the late submission of their bid. GGV’s application was not contested by Apollo. Miss Simor and Mr Wollenberg stated the case for the applicant and were questioned by Members and Mr Kolvin.

Following an adjournment, the meeting returned to open session and it was proposed by Councillor Romero and seconded by Councillor Bull and RESOLVED

1.  That the Council wishes to record its disappointment that the deadline was not observed in this case. It hopes that the Council’s requirements will be strictly observed in the future.

2.  However, it acknowledges that it has a discretion to accept late bids and that it is appropriate to exercise its discretion, on this occasion, in favour of GGV. Accordingly, GGV’s Stage 2 bid will be considered by the Council in the usual way.

The Committee then RESOLVED that

having been satisfied that the public interest would be better served by not disclosing relevant information, the Committee resolves, in accordance with the provisions of Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, that the public be excluded from the meeting for this item because of the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act as amended.

The Committee considered the challenge to Apollo’s bid by GGV. Miss Simor and Mr Wollenberg stated the case for GGV. Mr Nuttall responded for Apollo. Both parties were questioned by Members and Mr Kolvin.

[Councillors Bull and Brett left the meeting at this point.]

Following an adjournment, the meeting returned to open session and the Chair notified the parties that the Committee would not be able to announce its decision today, but that it would be communicated to them in due course.

The Committee then RESOLVED to adjourn the meeting until 12 noon on Friday 16^th December , 2011.

On Friday 16^th December the Committee resumed its deliberations in exempt session. It was then proposed by Councillor Clarke and seconded by Councillor Romero and RESOLVED unanimously that

the Council rejects GGV’s submission that Apollo should be disqualified from the competition or that the revelation of the Gala/Apollo joint venture necessitates that Apollo is scored zero across the board. The nature of its relationship with Gala will be taken into account by the Licensing Committee, when determining the Stage 2 bids, to the extent that it is considered relevant. The competition continues.

The Committee directed that the written reasons for the decision be prepared and circulated to members for their consideration prior to being signed by the Chairman of the Committee and disclosed to the parties.