Crackdown on vape shops and bookies as Burnham gives councils power to choose what is on their high streets
Andy Burnham has announced plans to give councils greater powers to block new betting shops and vape stores as part of a government drive to revive Britain's declining high streets. The changes will scrap the "aim to permit" rule, introduced under Tony Blair's gambling law reforms in 2005, which currently restricts town halls' ability to refuse licences to gambling premises. The move matters because it hands local authorities more control over the character of their town centres, which the government says have been "hollowed out" by the spread of vape shops, betting shops and other rogue operators.
Under the plans, new vape shops will need planning approval from next year, with the legal definition of such stores tightened to stop retailers dodging rules by calling themselves "convenience stores", while venues running 24-hour slot machines will also require planning consent. Police will gain power to close "dodgy" barbers, vape shops and nail salons for up to a year, double the current limit, to probe links to organised crime. The Centre for Social Justice, which found nearly 1,800 pubs have closed while vape and tobacco shops rose to almost 2,200 since 2016, welcomed the reforms, though shadow local government secretary Sir James Cleverly blamed Labour's business rate rises for high street decline and called for rate cuts instead.
- Councils to gain new powers to refuse betting shop and vape store licences
- "Aim to permit" gambling rule, dating to 2005, will be scrapped
- Police can shut suspect shops for up to a year to probe organised crime
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The government's move reflects a principled commitment to local democracy and community wellbeing. Residents deserve a say in shaping their town centres, and the evidence suggests vape and betting shops proliferate where pubs decline, hollowing out community spaces. The "aim to permit" rule from 2005 prevents councils from exercising legitimate democratic judgment about what serves their communities best, whilst strengthened protections against organised crime justify restricting problematic operators. Giving localities control over their high streets' character is a reasonable assertion of community values.
The case against
These are legitimate legal businesses, and blanket restrictions risk undermining small entrepreneurs and removing consumer choice without addressing root causes of high street decline. The real problem is online competition, high business rates, and post-pandemic shifts—restricting vape shops won't restore footfall or make landlords lower rents. Vaping serves public health by offering smokers harm reduction, which shouldn't be threatened by planning barriers. Better policy would address underlying economics through rate reform and business support rather than empowering councils to pick winners and losers amongst legal traders.