Committee cancelled: Lambeth Labour roll the dice on silence as opposition grows on No Casino U turn

Lambeth’s Licensing Committee meeting was again cancelled at the eleventh hour, ahead of a scheduled debate on the borough’s new Gambling Policy, with the council still refusing to explain how its long-standing “No Casino” clause vanished from the draft without discussion, authorship, or explanation.

The cancellation, ahead of its scheduled slot on Friday 16 January, has become a further catalyst for public backlash and opposition outrage, with many hoping to take the council to task over the clause’s removal. Critics have also focused on a consultation process widely seen as opaque and poorly designed, and voiced concern that the policy shift reflects a deeper corporate direction at odds with public health and community interests.

In December, Brixton Buzz first reported that Lambeth Council’s draft 2025–2028 Gambling Policy quietly dropped the borough’s long-standing ‘No Casino’ clause, a symbolic resolution that was reaffirmed as recently as January 2023. The change was not mentioned in public press materials, or clearly flagged in the consultation. Instead, it was buried deep in Appendix 9 of a 118-page draft, and referred to only obliquely as the clause “not being refreshed.”

Nowhere was the removal clearly explained or justified, and unlike previous gambling policies, the draft named no author or responsible officer. However, council audit documents show that Cabinet Member Cllr Mahamed Hashi was involved in discussions about the reversal as early as April 2025 with Nabeel Khan, Lambeth’s Corporate Director for Growth and Environment.

Although Lambeth has refused to clarify whether the removal was initiated by Cllr Mahamed Hashi or Nabeel Khan, a senior official is understood to have said the change followed “careful legal and policy consideration,” citing legal advice that the ‘No Casino’ clause could leave the council open to challenge. The same source said the removal was intended to “preserve the council’s flexibility,” but did not explain what that flexibility is for, or whether it serves the public interest.

Opposition leaders condemned not only the decision to scrap the ‘No Casino’ clause, but the way it was quietly concealed in council paperwork, without open discussion or public explanation. Cllr Donna Harris, leader of Lambeth’s Liberal Democrats, told Brixton Buzz:

“Lambeth Labour must treat gambling as a public health issue, not a profit-making opportunity.

With clear evidence of harm to children and vulnerable communities, especially in areas like Streatham, the council should stand by its ‘No Casino’ resolution and put public health before commercial interests.”

– Cllr Donna Harris, leader of Lambeth Liberal Democrats

She also noted that while the national Labour government has legislated to boost casino development, the Liberal Democrats passed a motion at their party conference supporting stronger local powers to block gambling premises. Locally, her group has tabled a motion for January’s Full Council meeting, urging Lambeth to reaffirm its ‘No Casino’ stance.

Cllr Scott Ainslie, leader of the Green Party in Lambeth and a former MEP, did not hold back in his criticism of the council’s direction. He said the move showed “contemptuous disregard for residents,” and accused Labour of placing “commercial gain over community wellbeing.”

He added:

“With swathes of exclusive hotels and luxury flats – many of them empty, serving as a laundromat for the world’s elites – is this about building Lambeth for residents, or for global capital?”

“The ‘No Casino’ clause was a safeguard – a line in the sand. Scrapping it signals a council that’s abandoned public interest in favour of private profit.”

“Meanwhile, long-ignored Lambeth residents – many struggling just to keep a roof over their heads and food on their tables – will finally have a chance at the local elections on 7th May to force Labour to listen.”

– Cllr Scott Ainslie, Lambeth Green Party Leader.

Brixton Buzz again approached both Lambeth Council and Cllr Hashi directly for comment. No response was received by the time of publication.

Filtered

With Christmas well and truly behind us, it’s time to look back to the gift that truly keeps on giving: Lambeth Council, or more specifically, Lambeth’s Labour-majority council.

And what a festive season they had, kicking off with the cancellation of the borough’s flagship free event, the Lambeth Country Show, scrapped in the name of savings.

But fear not, ye good people of Lambeth need not have worried. In the very same month the council claimed it couldn’t find £1 million to keep the Country Show going, they somehow rustled up £1.07 million for Capita Parking Services at the drop of a paper Christmas hat. Yo ho ho! And what pops up in our stocking next but a planning application for Brockwell Live, seeking up to 32 days of fenced-off parkland for ticketed festivals. ’Twas the season for corporate exclusivity indeed.

If you’re like me (or a consultancy firm) and enjoy a festive finance miracle, Lambeth didn’t disappoint. A quiet £59 million write-off in public loans to its own failed housing company, Homes for Lambeth, made it clear that the real Christmas giving goes to contractors, not to building council houses.

Meanwhile, one of Santa’s little helpers sent Council Leader Claire Holland an OBE, just weeks after the Local Government Ombudsman delivered a withering formal rebuke, citing Lambeth’s repeated failure to meet legal duties, its mishandling of complaints, and a culture of indifference toward the very residents it’s meant to serve.

And just as the curtain was about to fall on the Lambeth festive panto, there it was, the stealth performance of the year: the quiet removal of the borough’s ‘No Casino’ clause.

Not debated. Not properly announced. It simply “wasn’t refreshed.”

Whether “refreshed” is the most disingenuous word of the year or just plain insulting is up for debate, but one thing isn’t: the public responses to the consultation were completely ignored in favour of corporate greed.

Buried inside 118 pages, the removal of the popular clause was presented not as a decision, but as a disappearance in plain sight. If that’s not gaslighting dressed up as governance, I’m a fruit machine.

More Info

Gambler’s Anonymous

Contact Samaritans

Lambeth Lib Dems

Lambeth Lib Dems Insta

Lambeth Green Party Insta

Scott Ainslie Insta