Agenda item

A small casino licence was awarded by the Council in 2012 for the operation of a casino at Saw Close in Bath.  At this time a Schedule 9 agreement under the Gambling Act 2005 was drawn up which listed conditions which should be fulfilled by the casino operator prior to, and upon opening of the casino.  In view of the time period which has elapsed since the confirmation of the agreement, there is a need to provide clarification to ensure that the agreement remains workable and relevant for both the Council and casino operator.

The Team Manager – Environmental Protection and Licensing presented the report. She introduced Duncan Kerr (B&NES Team Manager Business Growth), Suzanne Davis (representing Century Casinos) and Craig Hoptrough (General Manager of Saw Close Casino).

She said that the proposal before the Committee today was in the nature of a tidying-up exercise. The tendering process for the casino had begun nearly six years ago. On 16 August 2012 a Schedule 9 agreement had been entered into between the Council, Global Gaming Venture (Group) Ltd, Deely Freed Estates Ltd, and Anthony Wollenberg, which specified a number of benefits that the Licensee had to provide, including local employment opportunities. On 20 June 2017 Century Casinos Europe GmbH had purchased the entire share capital of Saw Close Casino Ltd, the company set up to operate the casino. Saw Close Casino Limited had expressed uncertainty about the interpretation of conditions of the Schedule 1 of the Schedule 9 agreement relating to the provision by the operator of employment opportunities. It was felt that there was a need to clarify these conditions. In addition it was felt that because of changes to the local job market since 2012 and the difficulties that the operator might face in recruiting suitably-qualified staff, the applicable fine outlined in paragraph 3 of Schedule 1 of the Schedule 9 agreement should be waived, if the operator had made reasonable endeavours to recruit suitably-qualified local staff. It was therefore proposed to an additional condition to Paragraph 3 of Schedule 1 to the agreement, as detailed in paragraph 5.5 of the report. The original Schedule 9 agreement was attached as Appendix 1 to the report and the proposed variations as Appendix 2.

The Team Manager – Business Growth said that because of the increase in the number of hotels, restaurants, cafes and bars in Bath, the job market was much more competitive than when the agreement had originally been made. It was therefore felt that the conditions needed to be made fairer for the casino operator. Ms Davis and Mr Hoptrough said the employment situation had been very different when the original Schedule 9 agreement had been agreed. Mr Hoptrough said that overall percentage of staff to be recruited locally would be increased, but the target would be generalised across the whole work force rather than limited to specific roles. There would be a commitment to training and internal promotion for filling vacancies for professional gambling staff.

A  Member expresses surprise that it was lawful to allocate a proportion of jobs to local residents. The Team Leader – Resources Legal Team confirmed that such an agreement between parties was perfectly lawful.

In reply to questions from Members Mr Hoptrough stated:

• Gambling was the sole business of the casino, though there were several lounge areas and three bars. There would not be a dedicated restaurant, but food would be available. There would be some entertainment in a multi-use room on the second floor, but the room would also be used for gambling.

• Pay scales had not yet been finalised, but would be at the high end of the range for provincial casinos. He recognised that Bath was a high-cost city with a tight labour market and a competitive property market, and accepted that pay would have to reflect these factors.

• He would use his best endeavours to recruit gambling staff locally, and was working with local agencies to that end. The challenge was to find suitably-qualified people. If enough qualified people could not be recruited locally, he would have to recruit from outside Bath.

In response to a question from a Member about help for gambling addictions the Team Leader – Environmental Protection and Licensing explained that the operator had to submit a policy to deal with this issue

It was proposed by Councillor Kew and seconded by Councillor Appleyard and RESOLVED unanimously to agree the amendments to the Schedule 9 agreement contained in Appendix 2 and the proposed condition about waiver of fines set out in paragraph 5.5 of the report.