Peter Bedford is Member of Parliament for Mid Leicestershire and PPS to the Shadow Secretary of State for Work & Pensions, he also sits on the Work & Pensions Select Committee.
The Gambling Commission was established to regulate the Gambling industry with 3 statutory objectives of preventing gambling related crime/ disorder, ensuring fairness and transparency, and not causing harm to the vulnerable.
Like all regulators, it is also subject to the Growth Duty in that it has regard to the desirability of promoting economic growth. Yet twenty years on from its formation, the Commission’s actions are the antithesis of this duty as its heavy and inconsistent regulation puts the licenced market in jeopardy and fuels the black market.
For the last decade, the Gambling Commission have become an activist regulator funding anti-gambling lobbying (contrary to its own rules), lobbying for increased taxes on gambling operators (contrary to its duty) and developing its own dubious gambling survey which puts the rate of problem gambling at nearly 4 times that of its gold standard NHS counterpart.
However, it is the affordability checks debacle that best illustrates the wider failings of this regulator. In 2021 the GC ran a survey to test enthusiasm for a scheme by which adults who wish to spend as little as £100 of their own money gambling would be required to submit payslips and bank statements to bookmakers to show they can ‘afford’ it. It then refused to release the results of this survey for 3 years despite FOI requests and the requests of the DCMS select committee. The results eventually showed that 86% of respondents would not comply. They were introduced, nonetheless. Perversely affordability checks most impact betting on sports like horseracing rather than gaming which is seen by campaigners as more harmful. The result has been a drop in turnover for racing with and 3 times as much money now being bet in the black market compared to 2019. To cap it off, the former CEO denied they had ever been implemented.
Rank Casino recently received a £5m fine for regulatory failings. One reason was a customer winning £260k and then quickly losing £250k in the absence of intervention. Surely that doesn’t make sense – the customer was £10k in profit. The rules don’t say that operators should treat winnings as no different to lifesavings. They are apparently just supposed to know it.
The Commission clearly just doesn’t like big wins or big losses. Does it understand or care that punters who do aren’t simply going to stop gambling? The growth of the gambling black market might suggest not.
The courts have repeatedly confirmed that operators cannot be reasonably be expected to diagnose their customers with problem gambling, yet the GC are effectively compelling them to do precisely that. There are AI solutions used in other jurisdictions for identifying problem gamblers, but DCMS and the GC have seemingly chosen not to pursue them.
There is no synergy of interests as punter/bookmaker is an adverse relationship where each seeks to take money from the other. You cannot seek to regulate bookmakers as though they were professional bodies. Yet the GC is then surprised when mandated AML checks become conflated with commercial interests.
And punters are not being protected.
Odds are worse to cover the costs. Low value accounts become too expensive to service. When there is actual disputes the GC says its policy is not to get involved in ‘customer service’ issues. It just hands out incomprehensibly calculated fines after the event. If, as recently happened in the case of Bresbet, the GC withdraws a licence then the punters who lose the money sitting in their accounts to liquidators can ‘lump it’.
The Gambling Commission is out of control and failing in its primary purpose. It is strangling the licenced industry and sending gambling underground. It is time for major regulatory reform.
Peter Bedford is Member of Parliament for Mid Leicestershire and PPS to the Shadow Secretary of State for Work & Pensions, he also sits on the Work & Pensions Select Committee.
The Gambling Commission was established to regulate the Gambling industry with 3 statutory objectives of preventing gambling related crime/ disorder, ensuring fairness and transparency, and not causing harm to the vulnerable.
Like all regulators, it is also subject to the Growth Duty in that it has regard to the desirability of promoting economic growth. Yet twenty years on from its formation, the Commission’s actions are the antithesis of this duty as its heavy and inconsistent regulation puts the licenced market in jeopardy and fuels the black market.
For the last decade, the Gambling Commission have become an activist regulator funding anti-gambling lobbying (contrary to its own rules), lobbying for increased taxes on gambling operators (contrary to its duty) and developing its own dubious gambling survey which puts the rate of problem gambling at nearly 4 times that of its gold standard NHS counterpart.
However, it is the affordability checks debacle that best illustrates the wider failings of this regulator. In 2021 the GC ran a survey to test enthusiasm for a scheme by which adults who wish to spend as little as £100 of their own money gambling would be required to submit payslips and bank statements to bookmakers to show they can ‘afford’ it. It then refused to release the results of this survey for 3 years despite FOI requests and the requests of the DCMS select committee. The results eventually showed that 86% of respondents would not comply. They were introduced, nonetheless. Perversely affordability checks most impact betting on sports like horseracing rather than gaming which is seen by campaigners as more harmful. The result has been a drop in turnover for racing with and 3 times as much money now being bet in the black market compared to 2019. To cap it off, the former CEO denied they had ever been implemented.
Rank Casino recently received a £5m fine for regulatory failings. One reason was a customer winning £260k and then quickly losing £250k in the absence of intervention. Surely that doesn’t make sense – the customer was £10k in profit. The rules don’t say that operators should treat winnings as no different to lifesavings. They are apparently just supposed to know it.
The Commission clearly just doesn’t like big wins or big losses. Does it understand or care that punters who do aren’t simply going to stop gambling? The growth of the gambling black market might suggest not.
The courts have repeatedly confirmed that operators cannot be reasonably be expected to diagnose their customers with problem gambling, yet the GC are effectively compelling them to do precisely that. There are AI solutions used in other jurisdictions for identifying problem gamblers, but DCMS and the GC have seemingly chosen not to pursue them.
There is no synergy of interests as punter/bookmaker is an adverse relationship where each seeks to take money from the other. You cannot seek to regulate bookmakers as though they were professional bodies. Yet the GC is then surprised when mandated AML checks become conflated with commercial interests.
And punters are not being protected.
Odds are worse to cover the costs. Low value accounts become too expensive to service. When there is actual disputes the GC says its policy is not to get involved in ‘customer service’ issues. It just hands out incomprehensibly calculated fines after the event. If, as recently happened in the case of Bresbet, the GC withdraws a licence then the punters who lose the money sitting in their accounts to liquidators can ‘lump it’.
The Gambling Commission is out of control and failing in its primary purpose. It is strangling the licenced industry and sending gambling underground. It is time for major regulatory reform.