28Apr

White Paper Series: The White Paper, 2 years on

28th April 2025 Jessica Wilson 23

The 27 April 2025 marks two years since the Government published its White Paper. As we reach the two-year anniversary, we take the opportunity to reflect on the last 12 months and consider what is in store for the upcoming year.

Where did we get to?

At the one-year anniversary of the White Paper, we noted in our blog that a lot of work had been done by all parties to advance the implementation of the proposals in the White Paper, particularly through the publication of numerous consultations from the Gambling Commission and Government. Whilst progress had been made, at that stage there was no clear direction of travel (until the Gambling Commission’s response to the Summer Consultation was published, just days after the one-year anniversary). Whilst the Government’s goal of implementing the main White Paper measures by summer 2024 seemed like a tight deadline – particularly for the requirements that required secondary legislation – at that time we understood that the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (“DCMS”) would be publishing responses to the consultations on the statutory levy and land-based measures “in the coming weeks”. The industry was also aware that there would be a General Election in 2024, and whilst delays were anticipated, it was thought that this was unlikely to affect the final outcome of the White Paper proposals.

What happened over the last 12 months?

Momentum continued as we entered the second year since the White Paper was published, and the Gambling Commission published its response to its Summer Consultation on the 1 May 2024. Setting out the planned approach for financial vulnerability checks, remote game design, direct marketing and some land-based changes, the consultation response provided the industry with some certainty and confirmation that tangible progress was being made.

However, all activity was brought to a halt when the General Election was announced on 22 May 2024. Originally anticipated for autumn 2024, the General Election took place on 4 July 2024, resulting in a new Labour government. As the new Government was finding its feet (and was on summer recess), momentum in progressing implementation of the White Paper proposals fizzled, and the proposals that required secondary legislation and parliamentary time were put on hold. The second half of 2024 was quieter while we waited patiently for the Government to make its next move.

The Government’s original target of summer 2024 came and went, and it was not until 27 November 2024 when DCMS published its initial response to its consultation on the statutory levy, and confirmed its approach regarding stake limits for online slots (which were originally anticipated to come into effect in September 2024).

As we entered 2025, activity started to increase. The Gambling Commission launched its January 2025 consultation regarding Gaming Machine Technical Standards and Testing Strategy on 29 January 2025, published responses to the Autumn 2023 consultation on 4 February 2025 and 26 March 2025, and launched a supplementary consultation regarding the Remote Technical Standards on 6 March 2025. Additionally, on 25 February 2025, statutory instruments for online slots stake limits and the statutory levy were signed into law.

One constant over the past year is the notable lack of progress in respect of the voluntary creation of a non-statutory Gambling Ombudsman, one of the cornerstone proposals of the White Paper. The Gambling Ombudsman is intended to be an independent, free to use, non-statutory body that will handle social responsibility complaints from consumers and was due to start taking claims from summer 2024.

Key 2024 – 2025 highlights for White Paper proposals at the time of writing are:

The Gambling Commission’s response to its Summer Consultation on 1 May 2024, which set out requirements for many White Paper proposals relating to financial vulnerability checks, remote game design, direct marketing requirements, land-based age verification, and changes to requirements to hold a personal management licence.

The introduction of financial vulnerability checks on 30 August 2024. As the most controversial White Paper proposal, the introduction of such checks is a milestone for the industry. The light-touch financial vulnerability checks involving the assessment of publicly available data came into force at £500 a month to ease introduction. The trigger was reduced to £150 a month from 28 February 2025.

The passing of a Statutory Instrument on 25 February 2025, introducing the statutory levy under The Gambling Levy Regulations 2025 (“The Levy Regulations”), which came into effect on 6 April 2025. The regulations require licensees to pay a mandated levy to the Gambling Commission, unless the amount of that levy is £10 or less. The Gambling Commission published supplementary guidance on 7 April 2025.

The passing of a Statutory Instrument on 25 February 2025, under The Gambling Act (Operating License Conditions) (Amendments) Regulations 2025. This introduced online slots stake limits at £5 for those aged 25 and over (applicable from 9 April 2025), and £2 for those aged 18-24 years old (applicable from 21 May 2025). The Gambling Commission published supplementary guidance on 30 January 2025.

April 2024 – April 2025 timeline for the White Paper proposals

1 May 2024 – The Gambling Commission published its response to its Summer 2023 Consultation. Its response confirmed (a) the introduction of light-touch financial vulnerability checks for gambling customers with a net deposit of more than £150 a month, (b) the launch of a pilot scheme to test how enhanced financial risk assessments will work in practice, (c) new remote game design requirements to extend the requirements that already apply to slots to other online products, resulting in publication of new remote technical standards, (d) changes to direct marketing requirements obliging online gambling businesses to provide options to opt-in to product types and channels, (e) requirements for all land-based licensees to carry out age verification test-purchasing, (f) changes to the LCCP to confirm that best practice for land-based operators is “Think 25”, and (g) extension of the management roles expected to hold a personal management licence.

1 May 2024 – The Betting and Gaming Council published the Industry Voluntary Code on Customer Checks and Documentation Requests Based on Spend (the “Code”). The Code was developed jointly between members of the Betting and Gaming Council and the Gambling Commission, and is a voluntary interim scheme intended to bring “consistency across the regulated sector for operators who adopt it – until the frictionless financial risk assessments set out in the Government’s White Paper can be developed, tested and implemented”.

15 May 2024 – Progression of the Criminal Justice Bill, setting out new powers for the Gambling Commission to more effectively take action against illegal online gambling, to the report stage.

16 May 2024 – DCMS published its response to its consultation on Measures relating to the land-based gambling sector. The response outlined the proposed implementation of measures to: relax casino rules for 1968 Act casinos, increase gaming machine entitlement ratios in arcades and bingo halls, accept cashless payments on gaming machines, introduce a legal age limit of 18 for Category D slot style machines, and increase local authority fees. The majority of land-based reforms require legislation to be implemented.

1 July 2024 – Quarterly regulatory returns reporting introduced. This change was originally proposed in the Gambling Commission’s Autumn 2023 Consultation, and was confirmed in its consultation response published on 27 March 2024.

4 July 2024 – UK General Election.

25 July 2024 – The Gambling Commission published the new Gambling Survey of Great Britain (the “GSGB”), collecting data from 20,000 respondents each year and set to establish a new baseline for understanding gambling behaviour in Great Britain. The GSGB publication caused widespread concern in the industry about the accuracy and reliability of the data, that it will be misused and that it will give the new Labour government a reason to depart from what was already proposed in the White Paper, and have a longer term adverse impact on gambling policy.

30 August 2024 – Introduction of new social responsibility code provision (“SRCP”) 3.4.4, which sets out requirements for light-touch financial vulnerability checks at an initial threshold of £500 a month. The pilot for financial risk assessments was also launched and is expected to run until April 2025.

30 August 2024 – Introduction of new age-verification requirements, under SRCP 3.2.1, 3.2.3(8), 3.2.5(7) and 3.2.7(9) of the LCCP. The requirements oblige all land-based gambling licensees to conduct test purchasing and change from “Think 21” to “Think 25”.

27 November 2024 – DCMS published its initial response to the Consultation on the structure, distribution and governance of the statutory levy on gambling operators. The initial response committed to having the levy in place by summer 2025, with 50% going to the NHS, 30% to gambling harm prevention, and 20% to develop bespoke research programmes on gambling.

29 November 2024 – New requirements under licence condition 1.2.1(2) of the LCCP introduced. The requirements extend the ‘specified management offices’ to include the Chair of the Board, money laundering compliance officer and money laundering reporting officer, and confirm that the individual responsible for the overall management and direction of the licensee’s business or affairs is likely to be the CEO, Managing Director or equivalent. Holders of specified management offices are required to hold a personal management licence (“PML”).

5 December 2024 – DCMS announced its Gambling Act Review evaluation plan. DCMS expect the evaluation to be reported in 2026.

17 January 2025 – The revised Remote gambling and software technical standards (RTS) came into force extending the requirements that apply to slots to other online products.

29 January 2025 – The Gambling Commission launched its January 2025 consultation which sets out proposed changes to the Gaming Machine Technical Standards, the Gaming Machine Testing Strategy, and the LCCP. The proposals relate to consolidating and updating the existing 12 gaming machine technical standards into a single standard, and introducing five new standards, a licence condition and social responsibility code provision in respect of safe use of gaming machines. The consultation closes on 20 May 2025 and is a serious cause for concern for the land-based industry. We would encourage clients to respond and provide evidence as to: the disproportionate cost of the proposals and the adverse impact upon business relative to any reduction of gambling harm, whether the proposals are even necessary given existing safer gambling measures in their venues, and the huge impact on the enjoyment of gaming machines by the overwhelming majority of consumers.

30 January 2025 – The Gambling Commission published its online slots stake limit guidance on the Statutory Instrument, which clarifies the stake limits and implementation dates, and provides example scenarios.

4 February 2025 – The Gambling Commission published its response to its Autumn 2023 consultation. Its response confirmed (a) new requirements for customer led tools to give consumers more effective ways to manage their gambling by making it easier to set and maintain deposit limits on their online accounts, (b) the requirement that operators whose customer funds are ‘not protected’ in the event of insolvency must actively remind customers once every six months that their funds are not protected, and (c) the removal of the requirement to make annual financial contributions to a list of research, prevention and treatment organisations to pave the way for the new statutory levy by 31 March 2025.

10 February 2025 – The Gambling Commission published an update on the financial risk assessment pilot, which outlined the findings from Stage 1 of the three-stage pilot, identified the issues relating to data quality and implementation, and explained what can be expected with Stages 2 and 3.

25 February 2025 –Statutory Instrument, The Gambling Act 2005 (Operating Licence Conditions) (Amendment) Regulations 2025, signed into law, adding a new licence condition to all remote casino operating licences which introduces a maximum stake limit for online slots games in Great Britain. The total amount which an individual may stake in relation to any game cycle may not exceed (a) £2, where the individual is less than 25 years old, and (b) £5, where the individual is 25 years old or over.

25 February 2025 –Statutory Instrument, The Levy Regulations, signed into law, requiring all operating licence holders in Great Britain to pay a mandated levy to the Gambling Commission. The Levy Regulations came into force on 6 April 2025.

28 February 2025 – The requirement set out in SRCP 3.4.4(7) of the LCCP for financial vulnerability checks at £500 a month reduced to £150 a month, as set out in SRCP 3.4.4(6).

6 March 2025 – The Gambling Commission launched a supplementary consultation setting out its proposals for clarifying the definition of financial limits in the Remote Gambling and Software Technical Standards, to ensure there is a differentiation between “deposit limits and “loss limits”. The consultation closed on 30 April 2025.

26 March 2025 – The Gambling Commission published a response to its Autumn 2023 consultation. Its response confirmed (a) a ban on operators offering mixed product promotional offers which provide bonuses on the condition the consumer plays different gambling products, such as betting and playing slots, (b) a requirement to cap the wagering requirement of promotional offers to 10, and (c) rewording SRCP 5.1.1 (Rewards and Bonuses) of the LCCP to ensure clarity of the Gambling Commission’s expectations of operators around socially responsible incentives. Requirements to come into force on 19 December 2025.

31 March 2025 – The removal of SRCP 3.1.1(2) of the LCCP requiring licensees to make annual financial contributions to a list of research, prevention and treatment organisations.

6 April 2025 – The Levy Regulations came into force. The first invoices will be issued on 1 September 2025, with payment required on or before 1 October 2025.

7 April 2025 –The Gambling Commission published its statutory levy guidance to accompany the Levy Regulations, including details of who will collect the levy, who must pay the levy, how the levy is calculated, when licensees need to pay, how to pay the levy, and the consequences of not paying the levy.

9 April 2025 – The Statutory Instrument adding a new licence condition to all remote casino operating licences which introduces a maximum stake limit for online slots games in Great Britain came into force.

What can we expect next?

Changes which will be implemented in 2025:

1 May 2025 – New direct marketing requirements come into force.
21 May 2025 – £2 stake limit for online slots for those aged 18-24 years old to come into force.
31 October 2025 – New customer led tools and requirements regarding the protection of customer funds in the event of insolvency, and further updates to RTS in relation to financial limits come into force.
19 December 2025 – New requirements for socially responsible incentives come into force.

Other areas which will likely progress in the next year at varying speeds:

Establishment of the Gambling Ombudsman.
The publication of the Gambling Commission’s response to its December 2023 Consultation, which closed on 15 March 2024, relating to the criteria for imposing a financial penalty and penalty calculation methodology, and changes to financial key event reporting.
Implementation of the new land-based measures as set out in DCMS’s consultation response of 16 May 2024.
Progress with the Criminal Justice Bill in Parliament and extension of the Gambling Commission’s powers to tackle illegal gambling.
DCMS’s consultation on Gambling Commission fees.

The second year of the White Paper saw a number of the proposals “ticked off” with their implementation having now taken place, or lined up to take place soon. The overwhelming list of proposals has shortened, and the gambling industry is now gradually transitioning to the post-White Paper era. We look forward to seeing where things stand by the time of the three-year anniversary.

Please sign up to our blog to receive insight and commentary on the continued journey of the White Paper.

04Apr

White Paper Series: Gambling Commission update on the financial risk assessments pilot

4th April 2025 Tiffany Babayemi 60

On 10 February 2025, the Gambling Commission provided an update on the ongoing three-stage pilot of financial risk assessments (the “Pilot”) following completion of the first Stage. In this blog, we consider the Gambling Commission’s findings from Stage 1 and what can be expected from the next Stages of the Pilot.

What is the Pilot?

Following the Gambling Commission’s consultation response of 1 May 2024, social responsibility code provision 3.4.6 was introduced requiring operators in the three highest bands of fee categories, and volunteers in the lower fee categories, to participate in its Pilot of financial risk assessments.

Financial risk assessments are intended as a way of identifying high-spending online gambling customers who may be in financial difficulty and at risk of gambling-related harm. The risk assessment is intended to be “frictionless” and to be provided by a credit reference agency. The Pilot is being used to test how financial risk assessments can work in practice and to support a frictionless customer journey, and to assess appropriate thresholds.

The Pilot was expected to take place in three stages running from 30 August 2024 to 31 March 2025 inclusive, however, the Gambling Commission can extend the Pilot period until the end of April 2025 should this be necessary for practical reasons. Stage 1 looked at historic data, Stage 2 tested “more recent” data, and Stage 3 reportedly used current data. It is important to note that the Pilot is not a ‘live test’, and consumers have not been affected.

The Pilot is testing four set success criteria:

Frictionless part 1: What proportion of those high-spending customers checked could get a frictionless financial risk assessment if they were introduced?
Frictionless part 2: How quickly could credit reference agencies return a financial risk assessment?
Data relevance and accuracy: Is using credit reference data meaningful for understanding of an individual customer’s current or imminent overall financial risk and financial vulnerability?
Implementation issues: How could the data be presented to operators to help understand the level of financial risk or vulnerabilities associated with individual customers? How could operators build financial risk assessments into their overall customer interaction processes?

At each stage of the Pilot, the Gambling Commission has been testing at least one of the success criteria, and each stage is expected to provide different results. For example, the Gambling Commission stated that “it is likely that a smaller proportion of accounts would be able to receive a frictionless assessment when using historical data”. In our view, this is likely due to historical data having limited information available compared to more current or real-time data. The Gambling Commission has stated that its final decisions regarding financial risk assessments will also be informed by other evidence and data.

Stage 1 of the Pilot

When Stage 1 completed, it was considered by the Gambling Commission as “a pilot of the Pilot”. The Gambling Commission’s intentions for Stage 1 were to:

Test how the Pilot participants prepared data for the credit reference agencies and how the data was returned to the Pilot participants;
Test the Pilot reporting tools to see if the right data was getting back to the Gambling Commission; and
Refine and improve its systems for Stages 2 and 3 of the Pilot and identify issues that need further exploration.

Stage 1 looked at historical data for a cohort of inactive customers, and tested customer accounts which had met high-spending thresholds during a set period. The account details were shared with one or more credit reference agencies, which provided a financial risk assessment at the point the threshold was met. Stage 1 was testing what financial risk indicators were present when the account met the high-spending threshold. The credit reference agencies are replicating how they are providing financial data to operators as close as possible to automated or live implementation.

What were the findings of Stage 1?

Stage 1 involved more than 530,000 assessments across three credit reference agencies for approximately 300,000 accounts for the relevant year.
Approximately 95% (503,500) of these assessments met the first success criteria of a frictionless assessment. This means that the data shared by the operators was successfully matched by the credit reference agencies, which would allow a financial risk assessment to be returned to the operator in a frictionless manner.
Of the 95%, just over 3% were considered “thin files”, where the customer can be matched, there is no positive credit history, but the lack of negative indicators means they are considered lower risk in terms of financial vulnerability.
Approximately 5% (26,500) of the assessments were unmatched or the data provided by operators was invalid. These assessments were not able to receive a frictionless financial risk assessment. This is lower than the 20% anticipated by the White Paper.
Of the 5%, just over 4% of the assessments were unmatched (where the credit reference agency was unable to identify the customer and no information was available), and less than 1% were due to data formatting issues, invalid data, or duplications in the data provided to the credit reference agencies by operators.

According to the Gambling Commission, Stage 1 has primarily met the first success criterion on the proportions of customers that might be able to receive a frictionless check. It also provided insights on data quality and understanding (success criterion 3) and implementation issues (success criterion 4). Stage 1 did not look at the speed of an assessment (success criterion 2).

However, Stage 1 identified issues relating to data quality and implementation, which are to be explored further before financial risk assessments are introduced.

Data quality issues

The quality of operator data can play a role in reducing friction and operators can take steps to reduce duplicate accounts and rectify incorrect data fields to improve data linkage rates.
Credit reference agencies have unique systems and ways of presenting the findings back to the Pilot participants which caused some issues for the Pilot participants in assessing the findings. For example, a green RAG rating means different things across credit reference agencies.

At the time of the update, the Gambling Commission claimed that more can be done in Stages 2 and 3 to support operator understanding of different systems and allow credit reference agencies to make refinements to their models to reduce unnecessary variation or confusion. The Gambling Commission will also propose common definitions, such as time periods, to ensure commonality across credit reference agencies where needed.

Implementation issues

Pilot participants seem uncertain about the exact actions that might be proportionate when they consider both the financial risk assessment and the information they already hold and act on for customer interaction.

The Gambling Commission has created a working group of the Pilot participants to focus on these issues with the intention of informing guidance to operators. As part of Stage 1, the participants shared anonymised case studies to help provide early insight into how the financial risk assessment could inform decision making.

What next?

The Gambling Commission’s progression to Stage 2 reportedly involved testing more recent data and refining some of the aspects tested in Stage 1. The emerging findings from both Stage 1 and Stage 2 reportedly informed the Gambling Commission’s approach to Stage 3 of the Pilot, where current data is being used.

The Gambling Commission has emphasised that its findings of Stage 1 are preliminary but it expects the interactive and collaborative approach of the Pilot to prove worthwhile in testing how financial risk assessments might work in practice before final decisions are made.

Financial risk assessments were one of the more controversial proposals of the Government’s White Paper, and it is therefore vital that the Pilot is conducted carefully and transparently. Whilst, in theory, financial risk assessments are workable, one of the industry concerns was how risk assessments would be conducted in practice. Stage 1 has already identified possible hurdles, including the discrepancies across credit reference agencies. These practicalities must be ironed out for financial risk assessments to be effective, particularly as Stage 1 demonstrated that 26,500 of the assessments were unmatched or the data provided by operators was invalid. As such, without these practicalities addressed, these assessments may still create a disproportionate amount of friction for customers and operators alike. The Gambling Commission’s update indicated that it took these findings into consideration as Stage 2 of the Pilot progressed. Whilst the outcome of Stage 1 seems relatively positive, we wait to see the outcome of Stages 2 and 3 before a full assessment on the success of the Pilot can be made.

Please get in touch with us if you have any questions about the financial risk assessments Pilot or its Stage 1 findings.

27Feb

White Paper Series: Statutory Instrument published for online slot stake limits

27th February 2025 Harris Hagan 91

Following the final Parliamentary procedures, The Gambling Act 20 05 (Operating Licence Conditions) (Amendment) Regulations 2025 was signed into law on 25 February 2025 as a statutory instrument (“SI”).

As a reminder, the SI will have the effect of adding a new licence condition to all remote casino operating licences to introduce a maximum stake limit for online slots games in Great Britain.

Operators will have a transitional period of 6 weeks from the day after the SI was made (until 9 April 2025) to implement the £5 limit per spin for adults aged 25 and over (which will temporarily apply to all adults), and a further 6 weeks (until 21 May 2025) to implement the £2 limit per spin for 18 to 24 year olds.

For further details of the SI and the Gambling Commission’s guidance, see our previous blog: White Paper Series: Gambling Commission publishes online slots stake limit guidance

Please get in touch with us if you have any questions about the SI or the related Gambling Commission guidance.

12Feb

White Paper Series: Gambling Commission publishes online slots stake limit guidance

12th February 2025 Harris Hagan 115

On 30 January 2025, the Gambling Commission published its Online slots stake limit guidance following the Statutory Instrument (“SI”) (The Gambling Act 2005 (Operating Licence Conditions) (Amendment) Regulations 2024) which was laid on 10 December 2024. The SI follows the Government’s response to its consultation to introduce a maximum stake limit for online slots games in Great Britain. Subject to the final Parliamentary procedures, the SI will have the effect of adding a new condition to all remote casino operating licences.

What does the SI say?

The SI states:

1. The condition specified in this regulation is attached to each remote casino operating licence, including remote casino operating licences issued before this regulation comes into force.

2. The condition is that, for an online slots game, the total amount which an individual may stake in relation to any game cycle may not exceed—

(a) £2, where the individual is less than 25 years old, and

(b) £5, where the individual is 25 years old or over.

3. Where this condition is attached to a remote casino operating licence which was issued before this regulation comes into force, the condition has effect from the date on which this regulation comes into force.

4. This regulation is subject to the transitional provision in regulation 6.

5. In this regulation:

“game cycle” means, for an online slots game, the period beginning with the initiation of the game by the individual and ending at the point at which all money staked during the game has been lost or all money won during the game has been or delivered to or made available for collection by the individual, as the case may be;

“online slots game” means a casino game that is—

(a) a reel-based game, and

(b) is played online.

“reel-based game” means a game in which—

(a) moving or changing images or text are displayed by the use of visual representations of reels or other means, and

(b) an individual may win a prize or some other opportunity or advantage, as represented by the resulting arrangement of those images or text;

“stake” means to pay or risk an amount in connection with an online slots game.

Gambling Commission’s Guidance

As the SI sets out, all games which meet the definition of an online slots game will be subject to a maximum stake per game cycle. A game cycle begins when the customer presses spin and the stake is deducted from their account balance and ends when any winnings are paid to the player’s balance, or when the stake has been lost.

For customers who are aged 25 and older, the maximum they can stake per game cycle for online slots is £5.

For customers who are aged 18 to 24, the maximum they can stake per game cycle for online slots is £2.

Separately, the Gambling Commission confirmed in a consultation response for online games design that for remote slots, it must be a minimum of 2.5 seconds from the time a game is started until the next game cycle can be commenced.

Examples

The Gambling Commission also set out some examples:

Scenario A: A customer aged 27 stakes £5 on an online slot game. No other opportunities to stake can be offered until the game cycle has concluded as £5 is the maximum stake permitted for customers aged 25 and over.

Scenario B: A customer aged 27 stakes £2 on an online slot game. Further staking opportunities could be offered within the same game cycle up to the value of £3 for a total staked per game cycle of £5.

Scenario C: A customer aged 19 stakes £2 on an online slot game. No other opportunities to stake can be offered until the game cycle has concluded as £2 is the maximum stake permitted for 18 to 24 year olds.

Scenario D: A customer aged 27 stakes £5 on an online slot game and wins a prize offer which they can accept (and end the game cycle) or reject (and gamble their stake again for a chance to win a larger prize). Importantly, the customer is not being asked to stake any additional funds. The customer chooses to accept the additional gamble but is unsuccessful and therefore receives £0. The customer’s balance is reduced by £5 when they initiate the spin, and as they receive no prize their balance remains unchanged following the conclusion of the game cycle.

Who does the SI apply to?

As explained in the SI, the condition will apply to operators who hold remote casino operating licences, including those licences that were issued before the regulation comes into force. The SI states that for licences issued before the regulation is in effect, the condition will have effect from the date the regulation comes into force.

Timeline

The SI for this measure was laid in Parliament on 10 December 2024.
This legislation needs to be debated (usually scheduled for 6 to 8 weeks after the legislation is laid, although not guaranteed) and approved by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords.
After the legislation is debated and approved it will be made (signed by the Minister) and come into force.
From the day the legislation is made, operators will have an implementation period of 6 weeks to implement the £5 limit per spin for adults aged 25 and over (which will temporarily apply to all adults), and a further 6 weeks to implement the £2 limit per spin for 18 to 24 year olds.

Please get i n touch with us if you have any questions about the SI or Gambling Commission guidance.

13Jan

Reminder: Changes to remote games design requirements come into force on 17 January 2025

13th January 2025 Tiffany Babayemi 96

The Gambling Commission has reminded licensees that on 17 January 2025, the revised remote gambling and software technical standards (“RTS”) will take effect, introducing new requirements to extend the rules that already apply to slots, to other online products. Licensees should ensure their online games are compliant with the new requirements of the RTS before 17 January 2025.

Background

In May 2024, the Gambling Commission published its response to its Summer 2023 consultation in which it confirmed that it would proceed with the Game Design proposals as set out in the consultation. The changes to the RTS include the introduction of a minimum speed of play, features which reduce thinking time or contribute to dissociation from the act of gambling, and display of the amount of time and spend.

Summary of the proposals and the new requirements

Proposal 1: Player-led ‘spin stop’ features

RTS requirement 14E: The gambling system must not permit a customer to reduce the time until the result is presented.

RTS implementation guidance 14E:

Features such as turbo, quick spin and slam stop are not permitted. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list but to illustrate the types of features the requirement is referring to.
This applies to all remote games, regardless of game cycle speed.
This requirement does not apply to bonus and/or feature games where an additional stake is not wagered.

Applies to: all casino.

Proposal 2: Minimum speed of play

RTS requirement 14G: It must be a minimum of 5 seconds from the time a game is started until the next game cycle can be commenced. It must always be necessary to release and then depress the ‘start button’ or take equivalent action to commence a game cycle.

RTS implementation guidance 14G:

A game cycle starts when a player depresses the ‘start button’ or takes equivalent action to initiate the game and ends when all money or money’s worth staked or won during the game has been either lost or delivered to, or made available for collection by the player and the start button or equivalent becomes available to initiate the next game.
A player should commit to each game cycle individually, continued contact with a button, key or screen should not initiate a new game cycle.

Applies to: all casino games (excluding peer-to-peer poker and slots).

Proposal 3: Prohibition on autoplay

RTS requirement 8A: The gambling system must require a customer to commit to each game cycle individually.

RTS implementation guidance 8A:

This requirement does not prohibit offering functionality to automatically post blinds in peer-to-peer poker.

Applies to: all gaming (including bingo).

Proposal 4: Prohibition of features which may give the illusion of “false wins”

RTS requirement 14F: The gambling system must not celebrate a return which is less than or equal to the total stake gambled.

RTS implementation guidance 14F:

By ‘celebrate’, the Gambling Commission means the use of auditory or visual effects that are associated with a win are not permitted for returns which are less than or equal to last total amount staked.
The following items provide guidelines for reasonable steps to inform the customer of the result of their game cycle:

Display of total amount awarded.
Winning lines displayed for a short period of time that will be considered sufficient to inform the customer of the result. This implementation should not override any of the display requirements (as set out in RTS 7E).
Brief sound to indicate the result of the game and transfer to player balance.

Applies to: all casino.

Proposal 5: Operator-led simultaneous products

RTS requirement 14C: The gambling system must not offer functionality which facilitates playing multiple games at the same time.

RTS implementation guidance 14C:

Operators are not permitted to offer functionality designed to allow players to play multiple games at the same time. This includes, but is not limited to, split screen or multi-screen functionality.
Combining multiple games in a way which facilitates simultaneous play is not permitted.

Applies to: all casino (excluding peer-to-peer poker).

Proposal 6: Display of net position and time spent

RTS requirement 2E: All gaming sessions must clearly display a customer’s net position, in the currency of their account or product (for example, pounds sterling, dollar, euro) since the session started.

RTS implementation guidance 2E: Net position is defined as the total of all winnings minus the sum of all losses since the start of the session.

Applies to: all casino (excluding peer to peer poker).

RTS requirement 13C: The elapsed time should be displayed for the duration of the gaming session.

RTS implementation guidance 13C:

Time displayed should begin either when the game is opened or once play commences.
Elapsed time should be displayed in seconds, minutes and hours.

Applies to: all casino (excluding peer to peer poker).

Proposal 7: Update to security audit requirements

We take the opportunity to remind licensees that the new security audit requirements under section 4 of the RTS came into force on 31 October 2024. Annual security audits conducted after 1 November 2024 must be to the updated to comply with the International Organization for Standardization (ISO)27001:2022.

Next Steps

The new RTS requirements come into force on 17 January 2025, meaning licensees must adhere to these requirements before this date.

Please get in touch if you have any questions about the new game design requirements.

16Dec

White Paper Series: Gambling Act Review Evaluation Plan – finding “the right balance of regulation in the digital age”

16th December 2024 Ting Fung 103

The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (“DCMS”) announced on 5 December 2024 that it will work with the Gambling Commission to deliver an appropriate programme of work to evaluate the impact of the policy measures implemented following the Gambling Act Review (“GAR”).

The previous Conservative Government’s plans for reform of gambling regulation involved over 60 key policy proposals, which were set out in its White Paper: High stakes: gambling reform for the digital age (published in April 2023). In its announcement, DCMS recognised the difficulty of attributing observed changes to any one policy measure in this complex piece of work, particularly given that policy measures have different timeframes and implementation processes, and potentially intersecting outcomes and impacts, but emphasised the importance, nonetheless, of evaluating the collective impact of the GAR.

What has happened so far?

In January 2024, DCMS and the Gambling Commission commissioned the National Centre for Social Research (“NatCen”) to undertake an evaluation scoping study. As part of this study, the impacts and outcomes of specific proposals will be evaluated individually, as well in a package to understand the collective impact of policy measures that have been implemented so far.

NatCen then held a series of Theory of Change (“ToC”) workshops with DCMS and Gambling Commission colleagues to identify a series of specific policy measures that had been developed since the publication of the White Paper. The scoping work highlighted that this evaluation plan requires a proportionate approach, focusing on a number of specific policy measures in detail.

What will happen next?

The forthcoming evaluation will focus on evaluating the impact that can be attributed to a number of specific policy measures implemented under the GAR. For each policy change, the evaluation will aim to gather evidence and formulate findings to answer the following questions:

What intended and unintended outcomes and impacts have been brought about in the short and longer term by the Gambling Commission, DCMS and independently led proposals in the two-year evaluation that were introduced following the GAR?
a. In what ways, if any, did these outcomes and impacts link and interact?
Were the proposals implemented as intended?
a. Did the proposals introduced reach online and land-based gambling providers and consumers as intended?
b. In what ways, if any, did implementation vary from that intended and why? If there was variation, what were the associated impacts?
What was the distinct contribution of the DCMS, the Gambling Commission and independently led proposals in achieving the observed outcomes and impacts?
a. How and why did the proposals contribute to reducing gambling-related harm to vulnerable groups and their wider communities in the short-term and longer-term (or not)? What worked best for whom, why and when?
b. How and why did the proposals contribute to increasing gambling protections, while ensuring a fair and open safeguarding of gambling-related consumer freedoms and choice for customers in the short-term and longer-term (or not)? What worked best for whom, why and when?
c. How and why did the proposals contribute to regulating the online and the land-based gambling industries more equitably in the short-term and longer-term (or not)? What worked best for whom, why and when for the online and the land-based industries?
What was the combined contribution of the proposals in achieving the above observed outcomes and impacts?
What conditions were necessary for the proposals to achieve the above observed outcomes and impacts?
What internal and external influencing contextual factors supported or impeded the proposals to achieve the above observed outcomes and impacts?
a. In what ways, if any, did internal and external influencing contextual factors interact with the proposals?
What are the implications of the findings from the evaluation for the implementation of future gambling-related policy changes?

The aim of the evaluation is to understand the impact and outcomes of specific policies – both individually and collectively – and also to establish plausible causation related to the GAR policy measures with a high degree of certainty, carefully factoring in the impact of alternative explanations. DCMS emphasises the importance of the latter given the “many and diverse” nature of the policy measures in an implementation context that “is complex, dynamic and evolving”.

How will the evaluation be designed?

With the aim of establishing a clear degree of confidence in each claim, the hypotheses (i.e. the causal contribution claims) will be developed using Contribution Analysis, which is a step-by-step approach to data collection, triangulation and analysis based on a ToC and testable causal contribution claims. Process Tracing will then be used to ensure that the hypotheses are empirically testable and guide data collection.

The evaluation will draw on multiple sources of evidence, including qualitative insights and findings from quasi-experimental quantitative analysis. DCMS believes that quasi-experimental designs “will enable robust causal estimates of the degree to which changes in outcomes can be attributed to specific GAR policy measures”.

What methodology will be used?

The quasi-experimental designs will draw from online and land-based operator data, whilst in-depth interviews, focus groups, diary studies, and surveys will be used for qualitative impact and process evaluation. The latter would involve a range of participants, including operators, people who gamble, and other relevant stakeholders, such as local providers of support services. This will run alongside periodical tracking of GAR policy implementation and external influencing factors.

Who else is involved?

NatCen will establish two independent groups to provide advice and guidance throughout the evaluation, but these groups will not play a direct role in policy development:

Lived Experience Panel
This panel will work alongside the Gambling Commission’s pre-existing Lived Experience Advisory Panel, aiming to ensure that the voices of different groups with lived experience of gambling and gambling harm, including family, friends and colleagues of people who gamble (affected others) are considered.
Evaluation Advisory Group
This group will comprise researchers, academics and evaluators with expertise and experience in the field of gambling policy, research and regulation. They will provide independent assurance for key evaluation products and outputs, and assist evaluators in the anticipation and mitigation of risks and issues which may impact the evaluation.

Next steps

NatCen and the Gambling Commission will start reaching out to stakeholders in the coming weeks, with elements of evaluation fieldwork planned to begin in January 2025. Bryony Sheldon, Gambling Commission Director of Policy added in a blog post:

“The experience of consumers, operators and other stakeholder groups will be a key part of the evaluation in the coming months, as we welcome participation in surveys, interviews and other planned research. We will also use existing Gambling Commission advisory groups, and Industry Forum to both promote participation in the evaluation and help shape how we collect data efficiently.”

Several outputs of evaluation findings will be provided to DCMS and the Gambling Commission during and at the end of the evaluation to enable evidence-based insights in ongoing policy development and decision-making.

DCMS expect the evaluation to report in 2026.

Please get in contact with us if you have any questions regarding gambling regulation in Great Britain, the White Paper or the GAR evaluation plan.

29Nov

White Paper Series: Initial Consultation Response on Statutory Levy and Update on Online Slot Stake Limits

29th November 2024 John Hagan 119

The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (“DCMS”) announced on 27 November 2024 that the Government will bring forward the statutory levy on gambling operators to generate £100 million for the research, prevention and treatment of gambling harms. The Government has also confirmed online slot stake limits of £5 for adults aged 25 and over and £2 for young adults aged 18 to 24.

Statutory Levy

Gambling Minister Baroness Twycross indicated in her Ministerial Statement that the update is only an initial response to the consultation on the structure, distribution and governance of the statutory levy on gambling operators launched on 17 October 2023 (see our previous blog on the consultation), and that its aim is to publish a further response document in the coming months. The Government maintains its commitment to having the levy in place by the summer of 2025.

The Government has confirmed that the mandated levy will be charged to all licensed operators at varying levels depending on the sector, at a set rate for all holders of a given Gambling Commission licence, with rates accounting for the difference in operating costs and the levels of harmful gambling associated with different gambling activities. “In recognition of the higher rates of problem gambling associated with products online compared to most land-based products, as well as the higher operating costs in the land-based sector, the levy will see online operators pay more towards research, prevention and treatment.”

The Government believes that a mandated levy “will guarantee increased, ringfenced and consistent funding to prevent and tackle gambling harm” and “ensure all operators contribute a fair share”, stating that “under the current voluntary system not all gambling companies contribute equally, with some operators paying as little as £1 a year towards research, prevention and treatment”.

The levy will be introduced via secondary legislation. It will be collected by the Gambling Commission and overseen by a Gambling Levy Programme Board that will have central oversight, and which will in turn be assisted by a Gambling Levy Advisory Group that will provide expert advice on funding priorities and other emerging issues.

Levy funding will be split as follows:

50% will be directed to NHS England and appropriate bodies in Scotland and Wales to develop a comprehensive support and treatment system. This will include referrals and triage, through to recovery and aftercare. So “half of funding to directly benefit NHS-led gambling treatment system”.
30% will go towards investment in gambling harm prevention, which could include measures such as national public health campaigns and training for frontline staff. A lead commissioning body in this crucial and novel area has not yet been appointed, with the Government taking the time to get the important decision on the future of prevention right.
20% will be directed to UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) and the Gambling Commission to develop bespoke Research Programmes on Gambling, undertaking vital research to inform future policy and regulation.

“The current funding system for research, prevention and treatment of gambling-related harms reliant on voluntary donations from industry is no longer fit for purpose. While the industry’s significant uplift in the level of donations in recent years is welcome, we recognise that the quantum of funding is not the only requirement for an effective and equitable system.”

Baroness Twycross, Gambling Minister

The Government emphasises in its initial response that with distribution of funding to the NHS, UKRI and the Gambling Commission, “the gambling industry will have no say over how money for research, prevention and treatment is spent”.

A formal review of the levy system will be conducted within five years, where the structure and health of the levy system will be assessed, and adjustments can be made to ensure that the Government is achieving its aims.

Online slot stake limits

As widely anticipated, stake limits will be set at £5 per spin for adults aged 25 and over and £2 per spin for young adults aged 18 to 24, “bringing online slot games in line with existing restrictions on slot machines in casinos”. DCMS’ press release cites Evidence from the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities and the Gambling Survey for Great Britain which shows that young adults can be particularly vulnerable to gambling related harm with under 25s having one of the highest proportion of respondents scoring eight or more on the Problem Gambling Severity Index of any age group. It also reiterates that online slots are “a higher-risk gambling product associated with large losses, long sessions, and binge play”.

Next steps

Operators are required to maintain voluntary financial contributions to research, prevention and treatment until the levy comes into force, with Baroness Twycross adding that its initial response “should provide sufficient notice to licensees of our approach”.

As stated above, the Government aims to publish its full response to the statutory levy consultation in the coming months, which will also include further detail on the 30% investment of levy funds in gambling harm prevention. The Government notes that the statutory instrument is silent on the distribution of levy funding, including in relation to prevention, and it is pressing on with its initial response and progressing the legislative process to meet its commitment to have the levy in place by the summer of 2025.

In respect of online slot stake limits, these will be subject to an implementation period. This means that, following debates in Parliament, operators will have six weeks from the day the statutory instrument is made to implement the £5 limit and a further six weeks thereafter to implement the £2 limit.

We will provide you with updates in due course but please do not hesitate to get in touch if you have any questions.

Our preliminary thoughts on the initial response

At the heart of the White Paper is a balance between consumer freedoms and choice on one hand, and protection from harm on the other. The White Paper was broadly well received when it was delivered in Parliament, within all sectors of industry, by the NHS, in the third sector and at the Gambling Commission, because the (Conservative) Government had achieved a healthy balance in its reforms; crudely put, there was something in it for everyone. As we said in our inaugural blog on the White Paper in May 2023, however, “it is imperative that the process remains balanced and that all the key stakeholders see comparable progress in relation to their interests”.

The announcement of the bringing forward of the statutory levy by the Labour Government is undoubtedly a momentous day for certain stakeholders and a cause for their celebration, and perhaps unsurprisingly the language is emotive and provocative, with for example the NHS saying problem gambling has “skyrocketed” and resolving to do all it can “to protect gamblers from this billion-pound industry”, and the All Party Group for Gambling related Harm saying that “for the first time the gambling industry will be mandated to pay for the harm they cause”. Even the Government itself in its press release makes more of the £1 some operators have been paying than the £50 million in voluntary contributions by Betting and Gaming Council members this year alone.

That said, we believe that it was always inevitable that the Government (whether Labour or Conservative) would lead with the statutory levy before introducing any measures relating to consumer freedom or choice, such as the long overdue land-based casino modernisation. The new Labour Government had to establish its credentials as being tougher on the gambling industry than the previous government and deliver on its manifesto promise commitment to reduce gambling harm. And we would suggest it was also sadly inevitable that the rhetoric would be critical of industry, even unfair and misleading, particularly at a time when fundamental gambling statistics such as the percentage of problem gamblers in the population are so keenly contested.

But the statutory levy itself was a fundamental plank of the White Paper, so it does not come as a surprise, even if as rumoured the rates transpire to be slightly higher than proposed, again Labour being tougher than the Conservatives. Indeed, industry has been supportive of a statutory levy in principle for some years now. Nor are the online slot stake limits a surprise, with the previous government making a similar announcement before disastrously calling an early General Election. Further, the financial implications of both the statutory levy and online slots stake limits should already be baked into industry projections and should not have a punitive impact, at least in the near future, the risk of course being that the levy rates will again, inevitably, increase in the years ahead.

For all the above reasons, we are not for the moment overly concerned that the Government is heading in a new direction when it comes to gambling reform. This is not a policy area where the new Government might argue that it was left a “black hole”, quite the reverse, it was left a fully-fledged policy developed over many years and wrapped in White Paper, which it would be well advised to adopt and move on with other legislative priorities free from gambling distractions. Nothing has happened this week which was not expected and we remain optimistic that the delicate balance of the White Paper will be delivered by the Government and the Gambling Commission in the year ahead. We will of course continue to monitor for any departure from that course in future blogs.

With thanks to Ting Fung for her invaluable co-authorship.

30Jul

Gambling Survey of Great Britain: Publication of first annual report

30th July 2024 Chris Biggs 153

After more than 3 years of development and significant industry scrutiny, the Gambling Commission published the first Gambling Survey for Great Britain (“GSGB”) Annual Report on 25 July 2024 (“GSGB Annual Report”).

In a press release announcing the publication, the Gambling Commission stated that this first edition features responses from 9,804 people “but will increase to around 20,000 by next year.” The Gambling Commission goes on to state that the GSGB Annual Report provides greater insight into attitudes and gambling behaviours:

“presenting a fuller picture, illuminating participation rates, the type of gambling activities participated in, experiences and reasons for gambling, and the consequences that gambling can have on individuals and others close to them.”

We have previously explained the GSGB’s structure and purpose in our blog Gambling Survey of Great Britain: Gambling Commission’s new approach to collecting gambling participation and prevalence data.

We now turn to the key facts outlined in the GSGB Annual Report and consider the information published by the Gambling Commission to support the GSGB.

Key Facts

The GSGB Annual Report highlights key facts from the data collected from adults aged 18 years and older living in Great Britain, summarised below.

Participation

48% of GSGB participants participated in any form of gambling in the past four weeks. This figure dropped to 27% when those who only participated in lottery draws were excluded.

GSGB participants were more likely to gamble online (37%) than in-person (29%), however this difference was largely accounted for by people who purchase lottery tickets online. Excluding those individuals, GSGB participants were more likely to gamble in-person (18%) than online (15%).

The most commonly reported gambling activities were the National Lottery (31%), purchasing tickets for other charity lotteries (16%) and buying scratchcards (13%). The average number of activities for those who had participated in gambling in the past 4 weeks was 2.2 activities during that period.

Experiences of and reasons for gambling

41% of GSGB participants who had gambled in the past 12 months rated the last time they gambled with a positive score (6 or above on a scale of 0 to 10), 37% expressed they neither loved nor hated it (score of 5) and 21% gave a negative score. When participating in lottery draws was excluded the pattern displayed a slightly higher proportion of positive scores, with 50% positive, 31% neutral and 19% negative.

The most common reasons that GSGB participants gambled were for the chance of winning big money (86%), because gambling is fun (70%), to make money (58%) and because it was exciting (55%).

Figure 11 of the GSGB Annual Report displays the full list of reasons for gambling in the past 12 months surveyed, represented below where the percentages comprise individuals who reported ‘sometimes’, ‘often’ or ‘always’ as a reason for gambling for each statement.

Notably, GSGB participants were also surveyed on the types of leisure activities in which they participated in the past 4 weeks. The vast majority of participants indicated they spent time with friends and family (98%), watched TV (95%) and listened to music (91%), with many also reported shopping (80%), eating out at restaurants (73%), participating in sports or exercise (64%), doing DIY or gardening (61%) or going to pubs, bars or clubs (50%).

Consequences from gambling

GSGB participants who had bet on non-sports events in person were over 9 times more likely than average to have a score of 8 or higher on the Problem Gambling Severity Index (“PGSI”), which represents problem gambling by which a person will have “experienced adverse consequences from their gambling and may have lost control of their behaviour.”

GSGB participants who had gambled on online slots were over 6 times more likely than average to have a PGSI score of 8 or higher.

41.4% of GSGB participants with a PGSI score of 8 or higher reported experiencing at least one of the severe adverse consequences asked about.

The severe adverse consequences surveyed required ‘yes’ or ‘no’ responses and consisted of: (1) losing something of significant financial value because of gambling; (2) relationship with spouse or partner or family member breaking down because of gambling; (3) experiencing violence or abuse because of gambling; and (4) committing a crime to fund gambling or pay gambling debts. Overall, 2.8% of GSGB participants who had gambled in the past 12 months reported experiencing at least one severe consequence.

The Gambling Commission also highlights that the GSGB is the first time that it has collected data on the consequences of someone else gambling. 47.9% of GSGB participants reported that someone close to them gambled. The most reported severe consequence of someone else gambling was the breakdown of a relationship with a spouse, partner or family member (3.5%).

Gambling Commission Guidance

To accompany the GSGB Annual Report, the Gambling Commission released Guidance on using statistics from the Gambling Survey for Great Britain (“GSGB Guidance”). The purpose of the GSGB Guidance is to ensure the GSGB data is reported correctly, with the Gambling Commission reiterating that these official statistics are new and are collected using a different methodology than previous official statistics.

The GSGB Guidance therefore lists the purposes for which the GSGB can and can’t be used, as well as where it can be used with some caution, in relation to the data on: (1) gambling participation; and (2) the consequences of gambling within the GSGB Annual Report. Of note, the GSGB can be used:

to look at patterns within the data amongst different demographic groups;
to assess future trends and changes in gambling participation and consequences of gambling, measuring changes against the 2024 baseline; and
to describe the range of consequences that someone may experience as a result of their own gambling and as a result of someone else’s gambling.

The GSGB can be used with some caution “until further work is completed”:

to provide estimates of gambling participation amongst adults in Great Britain;
to provide estimates of PGSI scores amongst adults in Great Britain; and
to provide estimates of the prevalence of consequences of gambling amongst adults in Great Britain.

The GSGB should not be used:

to provide direct comparisons with results from prior gambling or health surveys;
as a measure of addiction to gambling; and
to calculate an overall rate of gambling-related harm in Great Britain.

The GSGB Guidance also addresses the misuse of GSGB statistics. The Gambling Commission encourages the use of the statistics to support the understanding of important issues relating to gambling, but expects that “anyone using official statistics should present the data accurately and in accordance with the guidelines presented .”

Reiterating the message issued by Andrew Rhodes, Chief Executive Officer of the Gambling Commission, in his open letter to the industry in August 2023, if an individual or organisation is found to be using the GSGB inaccurately, the Gambling Commission “may contact them and request that they correct the statistics.” In “severe cases or continued misuse of official statistics”, the Gambling Commission may refer the individual or organisation to the Office of Statistics Regulation (“OSR”).

Whilst the Gambling Commission’s expectations for the use of the GSGB statistics have been made clear, it has not defined what it considers a “severe” case of misuse. However, the Gambling Commission’s Executive Director, Tim Miller, stated during the VIXIO Regulatory Intelligence webinar on 23 July 2024 that the Gambling Commission will challenge any misuse “in an appropriate way” such as by referral to the OSR, which has included “some examples in recent months where has taken those sorts of approaches.” We therefore encourage the industry to ensure its adherence with the GSGB Guidance.

Strengths and Limitations

The Gambling Commission has acknowledged that measuring adverse consequences from gambling in surveys is a challenging task, and cites Professor Patrick Sturgis’ statement in his Assessment of the Gambling Survey for Great Britain (GSGB):

“Given the widespread negative social norms around gambling, particularly harmful gambling, obtaining representative samples and accurate response data is at the more difficult end of what survey researchers seek to measure in general populations.”

Furthermore, the Gambling Commission states in its press release that Professor Sturgis warned that estimates of problem gambling rates should be used with caution due to the risk that the new methodology “substantially overstates the true level of gambling and gambling harm in the population.” The Gambling Commission updated its Gambling Survey for Great Britain – technical report to include a list of the GSGB’s strengths and limitations and caveats for the interpretation of PGSI score estimates produced in the GSGB.

Having set out these strengths and limitations, its expectations for the correct use of the GSGB statistics and the consequences for misuse, the Gambling Commission has seemingly attempted to temper the industry’s concerns about the accuracy and reliability of the new official statistics. During the VIXIO webinar, Miller stated that the Gambling Commission has listened to “recognised experts in data and statistics in developing the GSGB methodology”, as well as the GSGB Guidance. Acknowledging that all methodologies have limitations, Miller stated that a key difference is that the Gambling Commission is “very open and transparent about what the GSGB’s current limitations are”.

Miller defended criticism of the GSGB’s methodology and noted that the Health Survey for England is not without significant issues, having presented an “inflexibility” to update questions for relevance and an inconsistent method for the Gambling Commission to collect data on gambling activity. Miller confirmed the Gambling Commission continues to invest “a significant amount” into the GSGB methodology and is “confident that as to develop , this will become the new gold standard”.

Next Steps

The Gambling Commission explains that in a typical year, there will be four wave-specific publications from the GSGB, plus an annual report. In his blog accompanying the GSGB Annual Report, Ben Haden, Director of Research and Statistics at the Gambling Commission, explains that the GSGB removes its over-reliance on the PGSI as a “proxy for harms” and, even at a headline level, “a more general analysis of wider consequences and behavioural symptoms will give a far more nuanced picture than ever before.” Haden also states that two “in-depth reports” will be released before Christmas as the Gambling Commission commences its deeper analysis of the GSGB statistics.

Where the Gambling Commission acknowledges that the GSGB may overstate the true level of gambling and gambling harm in Great Britain, the release of the GSGB Annual Report will not calm industry concerns about the accuracy of these official statistics. Indeed, we share this concern where the proposals outlined in the White Paper may be evaluated, and potentially derailed, by these statistics. The Gambling Commission promised a “gold standard population survey for the whole of Great Britain”, in its effort to improve the quality, robustness and timeliness of official statistics on gambling behaviour in Great Britain: this is no doubt a challenging task. Therefore, noting Miller’s confidence in the GSGB as the Gambling Commission continues to develop the methodology, we will continue to follow the GSGB closely with the hope that the Gambling Commission moves closer to its aim.

Please get in contact with us if you have any questions about the GSGB Annual Report, the GSGB Guidance or how these statistics may impact your business.

24Jul

White Paper Series: UK Gambling Act Review: What Now? VIXIO Webinar

24th July 2024 Harris Hagan 134

On 23 July 2024, Bahar Alaeddini appeared as a panellist on a VIXIO Regulatory Intelligence webinar titled “UK Gambling Act Review: What Now?” together with Tim Miller from the Gambling Commission, Sarah Fox from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and Dan Waugh from Regulus Partners, and moderated by Joe Ewens, Global Managing Editor from Vixio. This was the third webinar on the White Paper organised by Vixio. The panellists had an insightful and lively discussion about the current status of the White Paper proposals following the General Election:

Two earlier webinars took place on 16 May 2023, titled “The End of the Beginning”, 15 September 2023, titled “Defining the Future”. Please click on the dates to watch the earlier webinars.

08May

White Paper Series: Changes to Personal Management Licences

8th May 2024 Bahar Alaeddini 150

In our blog last Summer, White Paper Series: Transforming corporate culture by “driving personal accountability and responsibility” for lookers-on seeing most of the game?, we summarised the Gambling Commission’s key proposals relating to personal management licences (“PMLs”).

The Gambling Commission proposed to:

make clear that the person responsible for “overall management and direction of the licensee’s business or affairs” (which triggers a PML requirement) “is likely to be the CEO, MD or equivalent”;
require the person “chairing the Board (where the licensee has such a body)” to hold a PML;
make it clearer that those responsible for AML and CTF, including the Money Laundering Reporting Officer and Nominated Officer, need to hold a PML; and
assess, on a case-by-case basis, whether CEOs and directors of “parent companies or subsidiaries in the group” need to hold PMLs too.

On 1 May 2024, the Gambling Commission published its consultation response and announced it will introduce the changes as originally proposed, with only minor clarifications to make it clear that the requirement for the Chair – executive or non-executive – to hold a PML only applies to those that hold fixed or indeterminate office. Anyone appointed as Chair on a transient and/or short term basis for individual meetings will not be caught by the new requirement, but the licensed gambling business will need to retain evidence to support the fact the Chair’s role is transient and/or short term.

In our view, the Gambling Commission is striking the right balance with these changes, particularly with the requirement that Chairs must hold PMLs. Increasing the number of PMLs, particularly at a senior level, will drive personal accountability and responsibility, and thereby hopefully enhance the corporate culture and improve standards of compliance.

However, the Gambling Commission has not expressly addressed in its consultation response how the new requirements will apply to large gambling businesses (specifically, D. above), for example, group / regional / business division CEOs, MDs or equivalent, who may share the overall management responsibility and direction for the business in Great Britain. Based on the new licence condition wording, it only applies to the licensee, not its parent, related or subsidiary companies. This was a missed opportunity, and – despite the lack of clarity – our view is that the Gambling Commission would expect such individuals to hold a PML and thereby be caught by the new requirements, given that the licence condition is being implemented “as consulted” and the intention of the Gambling Commission in the consultation document was clear, as follows:

The group structures in which licensees operate vary and sometimes it may be appropriate for the CEOs and Directors of parent companies or subsidiaries in the group to hold PMLs too. This will depend on how these companies interact with the licensee and the influence they have over it.

Information on group structure, licensee interaction and influence is assessed during the process for licence application and during change of corporate control licence applications, and can be assessed at any other time.

Based on the information provided at any of these points, we would take a view on a case-by-case basis as to which individuals would need to hold a PML.

We consider that the proposed amendment to Licence Condition 1.2.1…would reinforce our expectations over which roles require a PML, and would make sure there is adequate personal coverage and accountability in each licensee’s business.

There is no one size fits all approach. Each case should be considered on its merits, taking into consideration how decisions are made, whether decisions can be overruled and by whom, and reporting lines.

Timing of new requirements

The extended requirements in relation to PMLs come into force on 29 November 2024.

Critically, PMLs must have been applied for, and been granted, before this date.

When can applications be made?

The Gambling Commission will be accepting PML applications based on the following timings:

MD, CEO or equivalent:	with immediate effect
AML and CTF:	from 1 June 2024
Board Chair:	from 1 August 2024

We regularly work with clients to prepare PML applications for their employees, senior managers and Board members. Please get in touch if you would like our assistance.

What do PMLs need to know?

If you would like tips for PMLs and employers or to understand PML requirements, such as key events, please read our overview guide.

Preparing new PMLs & training

It is imperative that PML applicants understand the personal liability that flows from holding a PML and, equally, the important role they play in ensuring business decisions are underpinned by the licensing objectives, building a strong foundation of compliance and raising standards.

Borne from our strong desire to help clients navigate the complex framework and landscape in Great Britain, we offer Partner-led PML training covering the key legal, regulatory and licensing issues for PMLs, Boards, Compliance Committees, employers and those in supporting roles, as well as scanning the horizon on key changes, including the Gambling Review, and providing practical advice based on our extensive knowledge, experience and expertise. Our training is entirely bespoke and tailored for each audience group.

Next steps

We strongly encourage gambling businesses to:

Identify the appropriate individuals who must apply for a PML now and not wait until the Autumn when the Gambling Commission is very likely to be deluged with PML applications and experiencing processing delays;
Prepare and submit PML applications early, ensuring they are complete upon submission (to minimise the risk of rejection); and
Provide adequate training to the PML applicants in advance of, or very soon after, 29 November 2024.

Please get in touch if you would like to discuss your PML requirements, PML applications or receive a deck about our PML training services, including client testimonials.