Gambling Boom in Poorest Areas: Brent Council and SMF Report

Key Points

• A recent report by the Social Market Foundation (SMF) reveals a 7% rise in adult gaming centres (AGCs) nationally between 2022 and 2024.
• One-third of AGCs are located in the poorest 10% of neighbourhoods, notably in economically deprived areas like Brent, North London.
• The report highlights links between the proliferation of AGCs and increased gambling harm, crime, and social issues in disadvantaged communities.
• Local authorities are constrained by the ‘aim to permit’ licensing rule, limiting their ability to refuse new gambling premises.
• Brent Council and MP Sarah Green (report foreword attribution) advocate for scrapping the ‘aim to permit’ rule and granting councils greater powers.
• Report recommendations include enhanced licensing powers, involvement of public health directors, fee increases, and clearer enforcement responsibilities.
• Practitioners and residents express concerns about the prevalence and impacts of AGCs on community wellbeing.
• Bacta, the industry trade association, did not respond to requests for comment before publication.

What are the findings of the Social Market Foundation’s report on adult gaming centres?

The Social Market Foundation (SMF), a cross-party policy think-tank based in Westminster, published an extensive report on 30 October 2025 outlining the growth and impact of adult gaming centres across the UK. As reported by James Noyes, Senior Fellow at the SMF, the research found that the number of AGCs increased by 7% nationally from 2022 to 2024, with a striking concentration — 33% of these venues are situated in the poorest 10 per cent of neighbourhoods.

Brent, one of London’s most economically deprived boroughs, was used as a case study in the report. The borough, with its high density of AGCs especially in Harlesden, Wembley, and Kensal Green, exemplifies the social issues accompanying such proliferation. Rates of gambling-related harm in Brent have surpassed national averages, with the estimated cost of harm rising sevenfold since 2012 according to a Brent Council assessment.

Dr. James Noyes noted:

“AGCs risk encouraging gambling amongst children and young people, as well as potentially encouraging crime.”

This is a clear signal that the spread of these centres is not merely a business issue but a growing social concern. Despite local opposition, authorities struggle to prevent new openings due to restrictive licensing laws.

Why do residents and practitioners in Brent oppose the rise of adult gaming centres?

The report includes interviews with Brent residents, frontline health workers, and retail employees, revealing widespread dissatisfaction with the expansion of gambling venues. Many residents believe the centres operate too frequently, are too numerous, and provide little community benefit.

An NHS health worker in Brent described the borough as having “pretty high need” for support services, while a drug and alcohol support worker noted that gambling establishments “are everywhere,” signalling the widespread nature of the problem. High street workers viewed the growing number of AGCs as symptomatic of broader economic and social decline, with one calling it a “slippery slope.”

Additional voices from earlier research by the non-profit group More in Common highlighted that this trend is not exclusive to Brent, but essentially mirrors patterns seen across London and likely nationwide.

How do current licensing laws impact the ability of local authorities to regulate adult gaming centres?

Central to the report’s critique is the ‘aim to permit’ rule, a legal clause which severely limits local councils’ power to refuse gambling licence applications. As stated in the SMF report and as emphasised by Sarah Green MP in the foreword, “local authorities are essentially powerless to stop” the opening of new AGCs despite the social harms these venues may cause.

Ms Green warned that this rule is “an outdated framework” conflicting with the Government’s wider objectives of reducing gambling harm. She called the rule a “paradox” that permits businesses which create harm while the Government seeks to prevent it. She advocated for its abolition, arguing that local communities need the authority to decide the role gambling plays on their high streets to protect vulnerable populations.

What recommendations does the Social Market Foundation make to address the issue?

The SMF outlines six key recommendations aimed at empowering local communities and better protecting public health:

• Grant greater licensing powers to local authorities, including the use of cumulative impact assessments, without further delay.
• Include public health directors in the gambling licensing process, similar to the role they play in alcohol licensing.
• Review premises licence classifications, particularly the use of bingo licences by AGCs.
• Increase the cap on annual licence fees payable to local authorities from £1,000 to at least £2,000, with annual reviews.
• Clarify the balance of enforcement and inspection duties between local authorities and the Gambling Commission.
• Ultimately remove the ‘aim to permit’ rule from legislation to give councils stronger control over AGCs.

Cllr Mili Patel, Deputy Leader of Brent Council, stated:

“Along with a further 44 local authorities – and grounded in the lived experience of our own residents here in North-west London – we have called for a set of urgent reforms to put pride back into our ailing high streets, restore local democracy, and put communities, not corporations, back in control of their destiny.”

How do adult gaming centres align with the Government’s licensing objectives under the 2005 Gambling Act?

Dr. James Noyes and the SMF report highlight that many AGCs are in direct contradiction with the licensing objectives of the Gambling Act 2005. These objectives include preventing gambling from being a source of crime or disorder and protecting vulnerable people from being harmed or exploited by gambling.

The report presents evidence suggesting that AGCs contribute to crime, anti-social behaviour, and addiction harms, particularly in deprived neighbourhoods. Despite this, the restrictive ‘aim to permit’ rule undermines the Government’s ability to enforce these objectives locally.

What has been the gambling industry’s response to the report’s findings?

The trade association Bacta, which represents the amusements and low-stake gambling sector, including adult gaming centres, was contacted for comment on the SMF report. However, they did not provide any statements prior to its publication.

What are the wider social implications of the rise in adult gaming centres in deprived communities?

The report, as well as the voices quoted therein, point to a troubling social pattern. The clustering of AGCs in the poorest areas appears to deepen existing inequalities and harms, impacting not only those with gambling addictions but also children, vulnerable adults, and the social fabric of affected communities.

Ms Green MP expressed concern that the uncontrolled spread could exploit vulnerable people, including minors, contributing to crime, anti-social behaviour, and broader social decline. The report thus calls for urgent government and regulatory action to restore fairness, accountability, and democracy to the licensing process.