Burnham to give councils more powers to block vape and betting shops
Andy Burnham has announced plans to give local councils in England, Wales and Scotland greater powers to block new betting shops, adult gaming centres and vape shops from opening on high streets. The move would scrap the "aim to permit" rule in the Gambling Act 2005, which currently obliges councils to approve new gambling premises that meet licensing requirements, marking a bigger shift than the more limited reforms introduced by his predecessor, Keir Starmer, in April.
Under the proposals, vape shops would be moved into their own planning category, meaning councils could assess and reject individual applications rather than allowing them to open as they currently do, similar to cafes or banks. Ministers also plan to tighten the legal definition of a vape shop and introduce rules preventing them from opening near schools. A six-week consultation is planned, with the measures potentially in force by early 2027; the push follows research warning Labour could face electoral backlash unless it addresses high street decline, though experts noted online retail's growing dominance means the policy alone will not solve the problem.
- Councils to gain power to reject new betting and vape shops
- "Aim to permit" gambling rule to be scrapped
- Vape shops to need individual planning permission from 2027
New here? Start with this
Betting shops and adult gaming centres are licensed venues where people can gamble, while vape shops sell electronic cigarettes and related products. Councils already have roles in licensing and planning, but national rules limit how they can decide whether some new shops may open.
The Gambling Act 2005 includes an “aim to permit” rule for gambling premises that meet licensing requirements. Planning rules also determine which types of business can open in different places; how shops are categorised affects the grounds councils can use to assess applications.
The debate is part of wider concern about the state of high streets and the mix of businesses they contain. Councils’ decisions could affect local streets, while changes to shop rules would not by themselves address broader shifts such as the growth of online retail.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Burnham's proposal recognises both public health concerns and the principle of local democratic control. Vape and betting shops can fuel addiction and disproportionately affect vulnerable groups, particularly young people; empowering councils to assess applications individually allows communities to protect residents and maintain diverse high streets rather than accepting automatic approval of venues that may cause harm. This represents genuine localism—enabling people meaningfully to shape their area's character and environment.
The case against
The current licensing framework provides evidence-based, consistent regulation applied fairly across the country whilst respecting business freedom and consumer choice. Granting councils broad discretion to reject lawful businesses creates uncertainty and risks inconsistent local decision-making; the article itself notes that high street decline stems primarily from online retail's dominance, not from vape or betting shops, so this policy tackles a symptom rather than the root cause. Adults deserve access to legal products, and local restrictions merely displace venues rather than reducing consumption.