Roy Ramm is well known in the wider world of security both as a detective while serving with the Metropolitan Police and now as Compliance and Security Director for casino operators London Clubs International plc. Una Riley spoke to him.
There are those of you who know Roy as one of the three originators of the Guild of Security Professionals, with Steve Neville (past Master) and John Purnell (Junior Warden). Another reason why many of you will recognize Roy is due to his many appearances on TV and radio. The media ask Roy to comment on major issues relating to many aspects of crime due to his extensive knowledge and expertise gathered during his years within the Met. Before taking on his commercial role he served in the Metropolitan Police for almost 27 years. Before leaving the force he served as the Commander of Specialist Operations at New Scotland Yard, where he had operational command of the Crime Squad, Flying Squad and Serious and Organised Crime Group. He was also director of hostage negotiations for four years. Roy joined London Clubs International in October 1996 and was appointed to LCI’s main board in June 1998. His primary responsibilities are asset protection and corporate compliance, but as a main board director of the public limited company he also responsibility for all the activities of the company worldwide. I caught up with Roy to discuss his position as a board director of LCI, which has five of the 23 licenses currently granted in London. However, it was not long before we started chatting about the Guild, now a City Company. I asked Roy how it all began. “What happened was in fact Steve Neville had very kindly invited me to the Guild of Firefighters along with John Purnell. We had a really good evening and when it came to the loyal toast and the chief fire officers stood to toast the Queen, they looked resplendent bedecked in their mess kit and robes. I turned to John Purnell and said that if the fire service can do this, why can’t the police? Steve Neville then said, forget the police it would be much better if we formed a Guild for the entire security profession. So, the three of us chatted about the possibilities. On our way out of the hall we met Victor Green who used to run IFSEC. Victor had previously attempted to start a Security Guild and had failed due to only focusing on the police. Victor said that we would never get the interest! So with that challenge we each went off and started talking to people that we thought might give us some support, both from senior police people to senior security professionals. Right from the start we all agreed that there should be a cross-section between the commercial side and the serving side. We wanted our Guild to be a vehicle where we could all get together as a means for charitable deeds and also to identify educational needs and help develop professional security programmes within the city.” I remarked that he must be very proud of the way things have turned out. He said: “I am really thrilled. From Steve, John and I, the initial three, generated a group of founders. Every one of them has put in an enormous amount of work and tremendous commitment. All our members are security related. I think that the Company has gained a lot of respect very quickly. I know that we still have a long way to go to attain full Livery but in terms of the fact that we have people from the police, forces, academia, education and of course the security profession, the Company does indeed represent the wider world of security. From the world of security we moved on to the world of gambling and clubs. “In addition to performing my security and compliance work I do a lot of other things as well. We are a ‘hands on’ board and as a consequence I am involved with driving many issues. Last year was extremely busy with legislation concerns which I am afraid took me away from other areas such as the Guild. Although I was unable to devote as much time as I wanted last year, this year is a different matter. There has been a lot of work to do in the area of legislation but having said that, this is a very interesting time to be in the gambling industry. For instance the Government has just restructured the Gambling Bill, it’s now out there, and it’s with the Parliamentary Scrutiny Committee. In turn the Scrutiny Committee has to deliver its report to the government by April 8. Therefore, we are hoping that the Bill will be into parliament prior to the summer recess this year. We are confident that we will have new gambling laws, the first since 1968, coming on to the statute books in 2004 or 2005. Overall the 1968 legislation does not address the needs of the modern industry. The Gaming Board of Great Britain is very keen to see new legislation. They are struggling with new on-line gambling, off-shore gambling and all kinds of computer based products. None of these schemes are covered by current legislation. It is absurd that properly run casinos that are regulated can not advertise, while these other organisations can take giant bill board advertisements.” We went on to discuss the similarity to the security profession some years ago when we had a strong self regulated sector being impacted upon by companies that did not and would not comply with anything or any external body. One of the reasons the security industry pursued ‘fit for purpose’ legislation in the first place was due to the unlevel playing ground. The security industry called for legislation of our profession not only with this government but also with the last, for much the same reason that the casinos are doing now. We continued to talk about the parallels of the two industries in this matter. Roy said: “The comparisons are very similar and I was keen to say to Molly Meacher of the Security Industry Authority right from the start, to look at some of the regulatory structure of the gaming industry. I’m not saying copy it, I was just saying look at it, it might be able to provide some guideline and may prove to be something to learn from.” We then talked about IT. Roy said: “The position is that as UK operators we can not run internet-based gambling in this country. We have got a great reputation because of our regulators, but the law does not allow us (the professional industry) to do business at that level. So the only place to operate such an organisation is to run it off-shore in some hot rock somewhere, one or two have done it, but we don’t want to do that. We want to be able to say ‘look this is a UK product, regulated by the UK regulator. If you bet with us you will get paid, if you bet with us, we will act with integrity; we recognise the entire dilemma associated with problem gambling. We will deal with all those issues because we are a bona fide company. We are established in this business we are not ephemeral. We are in the heart of London with established headquarters that can be visited if needs be. We endeavor to offer our clients the very best service. I believe we can transfer those skills to embrace any other area of business provided there is a level playing ground.”
Roy added: “In properly run casinos, there has been no prosecution of any UK casino or any one employed in it for any casino related offences for over 20 years. Therefore, we have a very clean industry struggling in a highly competitive environment. In the case of casinos that are properly run there is a duty of care for the client that does not exist over the net. It is complicated and indeed very complex to identify people who should not be gambling on the web.” I asked exactly how you can help someone that should not be gambling. “It is a case of identifying patterns of play. It is about the conversations and relationships that you build up with your clients over time. This enables you to quickly identify potential problems. One of the main factors is granting credit. Currently there are a lot of on-line casinos; on-line bookies that are granting excessive credit to people that can run up huge debts. In turn their assets such as their home can become at risk and in jeopardy, so it is a question of knowing your customer and controlling their limit. We mustn’t get hung up on the on-line question.” Roy outlined the difference between the excitement of visiting a luxurious venue where there is good food and wine and a convivial atmosphere where you are meeting and greeting people. Such leisure activity cannot compare to sitting in your room alone facing a PC. Roy said: “When you join a casino there is a 24-hour rule that applies for two reasons, not only for the client as a cooling-off period but also for the casino to perform the relevant checks on that particular person. Maybe they might have a gambling problem or simply the inability to pay, these are important issues as they directly affect the person not just our business.” We talked about these issues and the fact that they are not being taken into account with net gambling. The consequences that can result in heartache and stress for people. What is even more worrying is the fact that children may slip through the net or in fact be caught in the net … on the Net! I asked Roy if his organisation is geared up to start IT business once the regulation is sorted out “Yes, LCI like I guess most of the industry has been looking at it very carefully and is ready to get in to the fray with everybody else at the appropriate time. However, we want to do it properly after first establishing a suitable framework. So a lot of my time has been spent in trying to help both my own company and also the British Casino Association formulate a policy position and articulate it firstly to Prof Sir Alan Budd who ran the initial enquiry into gaming and then to the DoCMS (Department of Culture Media and Sport) and now to the Parliamentary Scrutiny Committee and then on to lobbying Parliament. The aim is to try to get a piece of legislation that is both workable commercially and will protect what the industry has built. I am afraid that people’s image of the gaming industry is largely formed by fictional representation that you get on the TV and the movies. They portray the industry as organised crime venues, peddling in drugs and prostitution … nothing could be further from the truth. We need to get that kind of image changed.” We talked about the importance of image within all sectors. Concerning image and the security profession, Roy said. "Increasingly policing is becoming focused in very highly technical counter-terrorism, serious organised crime, and that’s frankly all taxation can afford. It can’t afford to provide the great raft of common security services that many of us need so that is why it is very important for the security profession to be professional, so that I as a customer can buy a product that has been properly structured, properly priced and the people involved are not criminals.” Finally I asked Roy about his personal vision for his industry. He replied: “If I wanted to take my wife out for a Saturday night one of the choices should be a really good local casino where we can get a good meal and maybe dine and dance, and see a live show such as a cabaret.” Like a supper club, I interjected. Roy replied: “Like a supper club. Then if we want to play we can but I don’t want to have to drive 80 miles to get there. I want a qualitative night out. I think that is what a lot of people want these days. We don’t want clients that will come once and over-indulge. We want clients to make our venues lifestyle choices where they visit on a regular basis for a great night out.” Count me in.
