Ministers Discuss Affordability Checks
The UK government has confirmed that proposals for affordability checks will be dealt with as part of its ongoing Gambling Act review. The government is currently reviewing the 2005 Gambling Act, with a view to introduce new legislation before the end of the year.
Conservative MP Scott Benton led the adjournment debate, which discussed the ongoing government review of the 2005 Gambling Act. ©Naveen Annam/Pexels
New Checks Must Harmonize with Review
The update was given by Conservative MP John Whittingdale, who is Minister of State for Media and Data and is overseeing the 2005 Gambling Act review. Speaking at an adjournment debate on July 22nd, Whittingdale gave his clearest indication yet that any new checks must harmonize with the gambling review.
The adjournment debate was led by Conservative MP for Blackpool South, Scott Benton, who is also chair of the Betting and Gaming APPG. Benton recently hit the headlines for “fat-shaming” a Labor councilor on Twitter, following criticism of his acceptance of free Euro 2020 tickets from gambling firms.
Gambling Commission proposals for strengthened affordability checks are amongst a number of issues currently being considered by ministers as part of a wide-ranging review of the UK’s gambling legislation. The review, which was launched last December, aims to bring what ministers have described as “analogue laws” up to date with the digital age.
However, those working within the gambling industry raised concerns when the regulator’s consultation on remote customer interaction, which closed in February, included a proposal for a monthly net gambling loss of £100. Consumers would then have to offer proof of their income in order to continue to place bets or gamble.
The British racing industry claimed that the sport would lose at least £60 million a year from lost levy and media rights, as customers would be put off gambling by personal financial questions. At the time, chief executive of the Arena Racing Company, Martin Cruddace, labeled the move a mistake and estimated the potential loss to be closer to £100 million.
Proposals are Problematic
In the debate, Benton addressed those concerns, describing the proposed affordability checks as “a deeply flawed concept”. According to Benton, it would be too easy for consumers to circumvent affordability limits, as they could simply open multiple accounts with different operators. The proposal would only work with the aid of a sophisticated cross-industry system, which the MP described as invasive.
Benton also pointed out that most gamblers already have multiple accounts. Echoing the concerns already raised by racing industry leaders, the minister branded the plans as off-putting and burdensome for customers that only want to place bets for fun. Benton added:
“There is no evidence to suggest that this reduces problem gambling, only that it reduces gambling overall. It is also morally questionable—where would all this end? Should we place affordability criteria on other areas of peoples’ lives, perhaps limiting spending on fast food, alcohol or anything else that people deem to be potentially addictive?”
On a practical note, he also questioned whether it would be possible for land-based gambling operators, including betting shops and casinos, to enforce this type of affordability check. If not, they could be subject to different regulations to online operators, which would create an unlevel playing field.
Another concern that the MP raised was that intrusive affordability checks could push consumers into the arms of black-market operators. This point has previously been raised by the Betting and Gaming Council, which represents the UK’s gambling industry. Earlier this year the BGC warned ministers that unlicensed operators could stand to reap the benefits if legislation isn’t got right.
Benton went on to highlight examples of how the industry has already made proactive steps to improve its own affordability checks, such as Flutter’s “affordability triple step” and Entain’s ARC platform. These systems use behavioral science to target customers exhibiting risky behaviors and make interventions.
Balanced Response
Minister of State John Whittingdale responded to Benton’s concerns, providing fresh insight into how the government’s gambling review is progressing. After thanking Benton for his engagement on the issues and work as chair of the Betting and Gaming APPG, Whittingdale made it clear that the government has a simple vision for the gambling sector.
The main focus of the government is to ensure that new gambling legislation allows the millions of Britons who gamble to do so safely. For that, up-to-date legislation and customer protections are key, as is a strong regulator with adequate resources. The review, as set out by Nigel Huddleston at the end of last year, aims to strike a balance between player protections and freedom of choice.
Whittingdale explained that the review is examining whether further controls for online play could be effective in preventing gambling harms. This includes assessing whether more controls are needed at account or product level. He went on to say:
“We are also working closely with the Gambling Commission on its parallel work to improve how operators interact with customers, and we will ensure that any new checks that it introduces to increase protections for those who are financially vulnerable, binge gambling or losing significant amounts over time harmonize with the aims of our own review.”
Addressing concerns raised over the future of the Gambling Commission, Whittingdale said that it is “undergoing a reboot” and that the review is taking a look at its powers and performance. Andrew Rhodes was recently named as the Commission’s new CEO, and a new chair is still in the process of the being selected.
Closing the half-hour adjournment debate, Whittingdale noted that the review is still ongoing and that it is still scrutinizing the 16,000 responses it has received. A white paper is set to published later this year, laying out the conclusions and recommendations reached by the review.
