MPs Letter on Gambling Changes Is Said to Be Ill-Informed
Government policy is unlikely to be influenced by a letter from MPs.
Key Facts:
- Some MPs wrote a letter asking for a second Gambling Act review
- The letter also requested the government take further measures to tackle gambling harms
- It’s been called ill-informed by analysts for various reasons
- The impact that the letter will have is likely to be minimal
On Thursday, 8th of May, the Health and Social Care Committee published a letter to the Department of Health and Social Care. The letter asked the government to do two things: conduct a second Gambling Act review and take extra action to tackle problem gambling.
The Health and Social Care Committee quoted data released by the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities in 2023. In the report, it was stated that every year between 117 and 496 suicides were caused by problems associated with gambling.
However, some believe that the figure of 117-496 gambling-related suicides is misleading and that the numbers quoted are overestimates. This is partly why analysts have called the Health and Social Care Committee’s letter ill-informed.
Critiquing the Letter
Someone who has criticised the letter is Dan Waugh from Regulus Partners, who advises on gambling regulation, and in particular on safer gambling. He’s said the following about the letter to the government:
It is simply the latest in a long series of reports reinforcing the idea that gambling is a wicked pastime, that harms are on the rise, despite considerable evidence to the contrary and that the gambling industry is predatory– Dan Waugh, Comment from Regulus Partners on Gambling Measures Letter, iGaming Business
He also said that further restrictions on gambling practices will likely be passed by the government in the near future. If this happens, it will likely result from activism, which has been going on for many years.
As for the letter itself, he said it was ill-informed. He said that the Health and Social Care Committee had spoken with some anti-gambling activists and taken what they said at face value. The committee has then supposedly acted on this information without looking into it further.
Waugh did, however, concede that some of the recommendations put forward in the letter were reasonable. Indeed, stakeholders in the gambling industry have said some of the measures put forward in the letter are already in the process of being implemented.
What the Letter Called For
The letter called for a second Gambling Act review. The first one’s findings were published in a white paper in 2023. Many of the proposals suggested in the first Gambling Act review have been implemented or are in the process of being put into effect.
These include slot betting limits of £5 for players above 25 and £2 for those aged 18 to 24. There’s also a statutory levy to fund gambling harm prevention research and deposit limits for those depositing at gambling sites for the first time.
Another example is gambling adverts. In the letter, it was said that the rules regarding gambling adverts should be strengthened. Again, some of the suggestions put forward – limiting ads before the watershed, limiting the types of bonuses offered and making ads less kid-friendly – are already being implemented.
Finally, there was the matter of public awareness of gambling harms. The Health and Social Care Committee had been in communication with Liz and Charles Ritchie from Gambling With Lives. The couple, who lost their son Jack in 2017 to gambling problems, suggested that gambling harms aren’t as well-known as smoking harms.
The letter put forward the idea of having the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities launch a public information campaign to raise awareness of the many risks that are linked to gambling. The campaign should cover every possible gambling-related risk, including suicide and others that can have severe consequences.
Extra effort should be made to make gamers aware of the harms of gambling. This is because many video games incorporate gambling elements, such as loot boxes. Gamers are also quite likely to try out casino games.
According to Waugh, the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities takes gambling harms seriously but doesn’t necessarily have the authority to carry out the legislative updates and changes it has mentioned. It’s most likely course of action is to deliver effective campaigns promoting gambling harms.
