(Jamma) The work on the legislation and regulation of gaming activities resumes in the Piedmont Regional Council. In recent months, the directors have been busy examining and consulting on three bills. This is bill no. 255 (Definition of the principles for the establishment of gambling halls. Amendment to the regional law 29 December 2006, n. 38 "Regulation of the exercise of the business of supplying food and beverages"), presented by the Councilors Placido (first signatory), of the bill n. 257 (Provision for conscious and responsible access to lawful gaming), presented by Councilor Negro (first signatory) and of the law proposal n. 306 (Rules for the prevention of damage caused by gambling addiction and the regularization of gambling), presented by the Vignale Councilors (first signatory)
The three proposals were assigned to the Health Commission who had the opportunity to investigate issues related to the working methodology to be followed for the examination of the bills, given the perplexities on the unsuitability of the use, for the definition of the principles for the establishment of gaming halls, of a modification to the regional law n. 38/2006 (Regulation of the exercise of the food and drink administration business).
In fact, it has been noted that the introduction of an organic discipline in this law specifically for gaming rooms, also considering them as activities similar to administration exercises, appears inadequate, as the regulatory system of the regional law n. 38/2006 is based on the definition of the typological characteristics of the administration exercises, of the training courses, of the professional requirements, of the principles and criteria of network planning, of the rules for the release of the authorisations, of the sanctions, according to the economic logic of liberalization and simplification, easing of legal constraints and limitations, in compliance with the most recent guidelines of Community and national policies on the free circulation of services in the internal market.
In fact, in the regional law, in article 8, it is specified that the authorizations for the exercise of the administration of food are not subject to regional planning
and beverages in establishments in which the administration of food and beverages to the public is carried out jointly with entertainment and leisure activities (and these include the case of gaming halls) when the latter activity is prevalent with respect to the administration activity.
In any case, the legislation relating to the administration is always without prejudice to compliance with the rules of the consolidated law on public safety and sanitation, as an indispensable limit to the collective sustainability of liberalization actions in the economic field: specifically, it is the regulatory source which, first of all, it regulates gaming premises, in order to make their establishment and operation compatible with the needs of protecting public safety.
It was found that the two disciplines, that of administration activities on the one hand, e
those operating the gambling halls on the other, they are governed by conceptually quite different principles and logics:
legislation that regulates and does not limit, in compliance with the principles of competition and the market and the freedom of establishment envisaged by Community and national legislation, the development and transformation of the supply business is not suitable, in terms of purposes and principles, to include which essentially rest on reasons for limiting the location and authorization of gaming halls, in the main need to protect public safety, a truly secondary aspect in the regulation of economic administration activities.
From a legislative point of view, the Commission of the Piedmontese regional council noted, the exercise of the game is currently subject to state legislation and this activity is mainly dealt with by the Autonomous Administration of State Monopolies (AAMS) and the Guardia di Finanza, also in relation to the huge profits that the game produces.
Excluding casinos (which are authorized by special law notwithstanding the penal code relating to the exercise of gambling), there are two types of gaming establishments:
1. betting shops authorized by the police station (article 88 of the consolidated law on public safety)
- gaming halls authorized by the municipality (article 86 of the consolidated law on public safety)
For betting rooms, as the administrators have pointed out, there would seem to be no room for regional and municipal interventiongiven that these are activities with a public safety authorization from a State organ, never transferred to regions and local bodies, an authorization that is issued without particular limitations other than those relating to the moral requirements of the applicant.
the "municipal" playrooms, excluding the possibility of numerically limiting the exercises (the limit is already provided for by state legislation and is linked to the ratio between the surface area of the premises and the number of gaming machines that can be installed), the margins for regulating its activity (imposing timetables, distances from sensitive places, etc.) are rather limited, given the tenor of the legislation in force, the jurisprudence on the matter and, above all, liberalisation
in place.
Some judges, as was pointed out during the examination of the three proposals, maintain that any municipal regulation of this activity would be illegitimate, as
inspired by the purpose of protecting public order and safety, a matter over which the exclusive legislative power of the State applies pursuant to article 117, second paragraph, letter h, of the Constitution.
Hence the need to proceed with the establishment of an informal table between the signatories of the bills and the offices of the Regional Council
(local police, health, commerce, lawyers) and the Regional Council concerned precisely in order to prepare a possible unified text of the three bills.
After the perplexities, the first draft of the regional provision.
Last June, the Regional Council voted in favor of assigning the three bills on gaming during the drafting session. There would still seem to be some doubts about the draft, which is now being finalised. Hence the choice not to include the examination of the proposal in the agenda of the meeting scheduled for next week.
Indeed, in recent days the Health Commission of the Council of Piedmont took note of a draft unified text of the three bills in which the suggestions were taken into account, for the relevant parts of competence, of the interested Sectors of the Regional Council.
During the debate, however, the first presenter of the bill n. 255 requested that the same be examined by the Commission separately from the other two bills, as it is aimed at providing municipalities with a legislative tool useful for defining the criteria for setting up gaming halls.
Other Councillors, on the other hand, noted the need for the Commission to examine the three bills jointly, as they deal with similar matters, deeming the approval of two regional laws on the same topic inappropriate.
Hence the decision to postpone the examination of the provisions to a forthcoming session, in order to allow the council groups and the signatories of the bills to evaluate a possible shared procedure on how to deal with the examination of the three bills, also taking account of the hypothesis of a unified text prepared by the offices.
