During what was dubbed the “largest ever gathering of industry leaders” on November 10th, Andrew Rhodes, chief executive of the Gambling Commission (GC), found himself navigating the precarious path of implementing affordability checks across the gambling sector. This issue, more than any other in recent memory, has unified punters, the racing media, and bookmakers within the UK, all in opposition to the GC’s current stance, particularly in light of Rhodes’ contentious speech delivered just days prior on November 8th.
Rhodes’ challenge, and by extension the GC’s, lies in balancing the protection of gamblers with maintaining a sustainable industry. Industry figures fear the GC fails to prioritize their interests, a sentiment voiced by David Brown, an industry veteran and former executive trading director for renowned betting firms. Brown criticizes the GC’s approach as lofty and undefined, particularly concerning the how.
The current debate hinges on the GC’s claim that a mere 3% of betting accounts would be subject to affordability checks—an assertion met with skepticism. Brown highlighted that the GC’s measures, including their interpretation of ‘gambling at the time’, lack clarity. A considerable number of accounts in the disputed 3% belong to occasional punters—people betting on major events like the Grand National—who would rarely engage otherwise. The resulting uncertainty is how many regular gamblers will face repeated checks.
To resolve discord, Brown proposes the establishment of consistent definitions for terms like ‘active’ gambler and ‘dormant’ account across the industry to enhance data clarity and enable informed decision-making. The fear amongst stakeholders is that affordability checks will drive customers away from regulated bookmakers, which could drastically impact the statutory levy funding UK racing, a significant concern as the industry is the country’s sixth-largest employer.
Rhodes maintains that pondering the broader implications for sports is not within the GC’s remit, a position that falls to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). This stark viewpoint diverges from those who believe in a balanced approach that protects the vulnerable while minimally inconveniencing the majority who wish to continue betting sensibly.
With the cold light of hindsight available, the focus shifts to how the industry moves forward from this contentious state. Brown points to the outdated project plan from the white paper’s inception, resulting in skepticism due to missed deadlines and changing personnel—nearly five gambling ministers were involved, with the original deadline exceeded by a year.
Nevertheless, Rhodes underlines the progress made over the past year in mitigating severe gambling harm, a sentiment shared by Brown. He commends the substantial fines leveraged against betting operators as potentially pivotal in driving these advancements.
What’s the next step? Brown says agreement on common ground is essential, followed by a laser focus on differences and barriers. The UK betting industry has weathered previous storms, and the certainty of resilience remains. The key to moving forward is the industry’s ability to rally together to combat illegal operations, which affordability checks may inadvertently promote.
Brown stresses the importance of strong, collaborative leadership, citing early examples of successful partnerships between the GC, bookmakers, and Sports Integrity Units, particularly in tennis. A shared understanding of the challenges faced and an open-minded approach to innovation could yield mutually beneficial solutions.
Andrew Black, Betfair co-founder, echoed the need for new common-sense thinking, a call-to-action Brown fully supports. The collective industry voice needs to guide through the complexities of the current landscape, showing leadership and a willingness to learn from past relationship errors.
In summary, the rallying cry from Rhodes and the feedback loop with Brown’s reflections emphasize the need for unity in tackling the problems looming over the gambling industry. Only through cooperation and strategic thought leadership, as Brown’s vast experience suggests, can the industry look toward a brighter future while adeptly handling the delicate balance of affordability checks and sector sustainability.
