Harris Hagan Harris Hagan
  • Home
  • About
  • People
  • Work
    • Gambling
      • Online gaming
      • Land-based gaming
      • Licensing
      • Compliance
      • Enforcement
      • Training
    • Commercial & Corporate
    • Liquor & Entertainment
  • Recognition
  • Blog
  • Contact
Harris Hagan

White Paper

Home / White Paper
31Jan

White Paper Series: What’s next?

31st January 2024 Harris Hagan White Paper 181

In our last blog, we looked back at the last nine months. In this blog, we look forward at what lies ahead in 2024.

Open consultations

In the words of the previous Gambling Minister, Paul Scully MP, and as previously blogged by us, “ the industry to stay engaged as policies are refined, finalised, and implemented.” We continue to urge the industry to heed that imperative during 2024 and beyond, including on the following forthcoming deadlines:

  • 21 February 2024 – GC Autumn Consultation (on proposed changes to the LCCP and RTS) closes.
  • 15 March 2024 – GC December Consultation (on proposed changes related to financial penalties and financial key event reporting) closes.

The consultation phase is critical, with both Government and the Gambling Commission remaining under immense pressure to listen. We remain happy to assist clients with their responses where that would be helpful, as we did in the last once in a generation opportunity in 2005!

Closed consultations and forthcoming responses

We await responses (including implementation timeframes) on the following consultations:

  • DCMS Land-Based Consultation (closed on 4 October 2023)
  • DCMS Stake Consultation (closed on 4 October 2023)
  • GC Summer Consultation (closed on 18 October 2023)
  • DCMS Levy Consultation (closed on 14 December 2023)

What else is on the horizon?

February to March 2024 – Likely publication of Gambling Commission’s new three-year corporate strategy

March 2024 – Gambling Commission conference on illegal gambling

1 April 2024 – LCCP GAMSTOP and suicide reporting requirements come into force

TBC: Although the following items are expected, the timing is currently unknown:

  • DCMS consultation on Gambling Commission fees
  • Expected introduction of the statutory gambling levy
  • Establishment of a gambling ombudsman
  • Official launch of the Gambling Commission’s Gambling Survey of Great Britain
  • Extension of Gambling Commission powers to tackle illegal gambling (“when Parliamentary time allows”) Government review of the horserace betting levy
  • Government consultation on bringing remote gambling into a single tax structure

Want to hear more?

Please sign up to our blog to receive insight and commentary on the implementation of the White Paper during 2024, as well as other relevant industry news. 

Read more
31Jan

White Paper Series: 9 months in – where are we?

31st January 2024 Harris Hagan White Paper 185

It is now nearly nine months since the publication of the White Paper on 27 April 2023, which was nearly 30 months in the making. Following its publication, the Gambling Commission was quick to manage expectations by saying that the implementation of the White Paper “will likely take a number of years to fully complete”. So, where are we after 9 months? In this blog, and following the format of the White Paper, we look back at the progress made by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (“DCMS”), the Gambling Commission and the industry. 

Chapter 1: Online protections – players and products

26 July 2023 – Two consultations were published by the Gambling Commission and DCMS to implement proposals to improve online protections in the White Paper:

  1. a Gambling Commission consultation (the “GC Summer Consultation”), which included proposals to reduce the speed and intensity of online products, while making them fairer and increasing consumer understanding about game play and introduce new obligations on operators to conduct financial vulnerability checks and financial risk assessments to understand if a customer’s gambling is likely to be harmful in the context of their financial circumstances. The GC Summer Consultation also included proposals to extend personal management licence (“PML”) requirements so more individuals within a licensee would be required to hold a PML.
  2. a DCMS consultation on maximum stake limits for online slots (the “DCMS Stake Consultation”).  

4 October 2023 – The DCMS Stake Consultation closed (extended from 20 September 2023 following the publication of incorrect problem gambling rates). At the time of writing, we await the response.

18 October 2023 – The GC Summer Consultation closed. At the time of writing, we await the response.

29 November 2023 – The Gambling Commission launched a further consultation (the “GC Autumn Consultation”), includes proposals to ensure that tools are available (such as deposit limits) to make it easier for consumers to manage their gambling and increase transparency for consumers if their funds are held by licensees that offer no protection in the event of insolvency. This consultation remains open until 21 February 2024.

Want to read more?

Read more in the following Harris Hagan blogs:

  • Give your two pounds’ worth on DCMS’ consultation for online slots take limits
  • Transforming corporate culture by “driving personal accountability and responsibility” for lookers-on seeing most of the game?
  • Gambling Commission’s remote game design proposals – simply following suit?
  • Personal management licensee: What do you need to know?
  • Gambling Commission launches Autumn 2023 consultation

Chapter 2: Marketing and advertising

19 June 2023 – The Gambling Commission published a new hub for operators engaging with third parties. 

25 July 2023 – As part of wider work by Government on online advertising and consumer protection, DCMS published its consultation response to the Online Advertising Programme.

26 July 2023 – The GC Summer Consultation was published, which included proposals to improve consumer choice on direct marketing by giving consumers more control over the direct gambling marketing they wish to receive.

5 September 2023 – The Betting & Gaming Council published the seventh edition of the Industry Group for Responsible Gambling Code for Socially Responsible Advertising (the “IGRG Code”), which notably:

  1. extended safer gambling messaging requirements to 20% of advertising space across online and broadcast media (previously, this commitment only applied to television and radio); and
  2. extended the 25+ rule to all digital media platforms, including those which operate age verification processes.

Throughout 2023, the Advertising Standards Authority (“ASA”) has also been making full use of artificial intelligence through its Active Ad Monitoring system in order to review and regulate online advertising. Since August 2023, there have been at least seven rulings on gambling adverts, which the ASA states have formed:

“part of a wider piece of work banning gambling ads which, under strengthened rules, are prohibited from being likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.”

18 October 2023 – The GC Summer Consultation closed. At the time of writing, we await the response.

29 November 2023 – The GC Autumn Consultation was published and included proposals to ensure free bets and bonuses are more socially responsible and do not encourage harmful or excessive gambling. This consultation remains open until 21 February 2024.

1 December 2023 – The IGRG Code came into force.

Want to read more?

Read more in the following Harris Hagan blogs:

  • Judgement by the company you keep: Licensees’ responsibilities for third parties
  • Online Advertising Programme Consultation: Impacts for the gambling industry
  • Direct marketing and cross-selling in the crossfire
  • New Industry Code for Responsible Gambling (7th edition) comes into force this week
  • Advertise with caution: ASA shine AI-fuelled torch on foul play

Chapter 3: The Gambling Commission’s powers and resources

23 May 2023 – The Gambling Commission published Evidence Gaps & Priorities, a document outlining current evidence gaps and the Gambling Commission’s approach to address these over the next three years.

26 July 2023 – The GC Summer Consultation was published and included proposals to change the composition and decision-making processes of the Gambling Commission’s regulatory panels. Note that this change was not proposed in the White Paper.

17 October 2023 – DCMS published its consultation on the statutory gambling levy (the “DCMS Levy Consultation”), which set out proposals for the structure, distribution and governance of the statutory levy for gambling operators.

18 October 2023 – The GC Summer Consultation closed. At the time of writing, we await the response.

23 October 2023 – The Gambling Commission called licensees to participate in a user research programme aimed at sharpening the dataset received through regulatory returns.

22 November 2023 – The Government published the Autumn Statement 2023, which included proposals to change the structure of remote gambling taxation.

23 November 2023 – The Gambling Commission published its first ‘experimental’ statistics from the Gambling Survey of Great Britain, which will become the data source for the Gambling Commission’s official adult gambling participation and problem gambling prevalence statistics in 2024.

29 November 2023 – The GC Autumn Consultation was published and included proposed changes to the LCCP to increase the frequency of regulatory returns and standardise reporting periods across the industry and remove the current voluntary system for funding research, prevention and treatment, once the statutory gambling levy is in force.

14 December 2023 – The DCMS Levy Consultation closed. At the time of writing, we await the response.

15 December 2023 – Although not specifically proposed in the White Paper, the Gambling Commission published a further 2023 consultation on 15 December 2023 (the “GC December Consultation”), which included proposals to update its Statement of Principles for Determining Financial Penalties to make changes to the criteria for imposing a financial penalty and the methodology for determining the amount of the penalty and add new key reporting requirements to the LCCP.

21 February 2024 – GC Autumn Consultation closes.

15 March 2024 – GC December Consultation closes.

Want to read more?

Read more in the following Harris Hagan blogs:

  • Evidence gaps and priorities 2023 to 2026
  • Gambling Survey of Great Britain: Gambling Commission’s new approach to collecting gambling participation and prevalence data
  • Regulatory Panel changes – Fair or unfair?
  • DCMS statutory levy consultation – polluters pay is the fairest way…
  • Regulatory returns update: Gambling Commission conducting user research sessions
  • “Naughty or Nice?” – the Gambling Commission publishes its latest consultation on financial penalties and financial key event reporting

Chapter 4: Dispute resolution and consumer redress

The process for the appointment of a gambling ombudsman was timetabled to commence in Spring/Summer 2023. Government expects the ombudsman to be accepting complaints within a year of the publication of the White Paper. We are not aware of any public updates in this area since the White Paper was published.

Want to read more?

Read more in the following Harris Hagan blog:

  • Gambling Ombudsman – a new approach to consumer redress

Chapter 5: Children and young adults

18 July 2023 – The Gambling Commission clarified its approach to vulnerability and its expectations of licensees, ahead of the publication of its updated customer interaction guidance for remote gambling licensees, which was issued on 23 August 2023.

31 October 2023 – The customer interaction guidance came into effect.

Want to read more?

Read more in the following Harris Hagan blog:

  • Gambling Commission publishes new remote customer interaction guidance

Chapter 6: Land-based gambling

26 July 2023 – DCMS published a consultation (the “DCMS Land-Based Consultation”), which included proposals to relax casino rules relating to table/machine ratios, improve age verification measures, introduce cashless payments on gaming machines and increase licensing authority fees.

4 October 2023 – The DCMS Land-Based Consultation closed. At the time of writing, we await the response.

Want to read more?

Read more in the following Harris Hagan blogs:

  • Cashless payments – finally bringing the land-based sector into the digital age?
  • Time to think – Gambling Commission consultation on land-based age verification measures

Want to hear more?

Please sign up to our blog to receive insight and commentary on the implementation of the White Paper during 2024, as well as other relevant industry news. 

Read more
21Dec

DCMS Committee on gambling regulation publishes its report 

21st December 2023 Francesca Burnett-Hall Uncategorised, White Paper 172

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport (“DCMS”) Committee on gambling regulation, appointed by the House of Commons, has today published its report with its conclusions and recommendations to Government. 

The inquiry launched in December 2022, at a time when there was considerable uncertainty about the status of the Gambling White Paper.  The original terms of reference were as follows: 

  • What is the scale of gambling-related harm in the UK? 
  • What should the key priorities be in the gambling White Paper?
  • How broadly should the term ‘gambling’ be drawn?
  • Is it possible for a regulator to stay abreast of innovation in the online sphere?
  • What additional problems arise when online gambling companies are based outside UK jurisdiction?

After the publication of the White Paper, on 27 April 2023, the terms of reference were broadened to include: 

  • What are the most welcome proposals in the Gambling White Paper?
  • Are there any significant gaps in the Government’s reforms?  
  • What are the potential barriers to the Government and Gambling Commission delivering the White Paper’s main measure by summer 2024, the Government’s stated aim? 

Culture Media and Sport, Chair, Dame Caroline Dinenage MP, said: 

“While gambling regulation should not overly impinge on the freedom to enjoy what is a problem-free pastime for the majority, more should be done to shield both children and people who have experienced problem gambling from what often seems like a bombardment of advertising branding at football and other sporting events. The Government needs to go further than the proposals in the White Paper and work with sports governing bodies on cutting the sheer volume of betting adverts people are being exposed to.” 

The Committee received more than 160 submissions and held four oral evidence sessions.   

Main conclusions and recommendations:  

Implementation of the Gambling White Paper 

  • The Government must set out a detailed timetable for the delivery of the White Paper’s proposals, with the Committee concerned that there was no mention of gambling legislation in the King’s Speech. 
  • The Government and Gambling Commission should set out how they will address the growing trend of unlicensed gambling sites targeting the self-excluded. The Gambling Commission must also continue to work to improve its knowledge of the black market and its ability to monitor the number of British consumers gambling with illegal operators. 

Online gambling protections 

  • The Committee supports the principle of financial risk checks, but they must be minimally intrusive with customers’ financial data properly protected. There should be a pilot of the new system before the checks are fully implemented. 
  • Stake limits for online slots should match those for electronic gaming machines in land-based venues and not exceed £5. Online deposit limits should be set by default and require customers to opt out rather than opt in. 

Children and young adults 

  • The Government should review the case for banning children’s access to social casino games, which are often playable on smartphones and simulate gambling activities and products. 
  • The Committee supports the proposed enhanced online gambling protections for young adults aged 18-24, namely triggering a financial risk check at a lower monetary loss threshold and limiting the stake for online slots to £2. The Government, Gambling Commission, and gambling operators must ensure these measures do not unintentionally lead to more adults in this age group giving a higher age at account-creation. 

Gambling advertising 

  • There is an urgent need to better understand the effects of gambling advertising on the risk of harm. The evidence for a link between advertising and gambling harm currently appears much stronger than evidence indicating there is a risk of displacement to the black market if gambling advertising were restricted. The Government must commission research on the link between gambling advertising and the risk of gambling harm, including specifically for women and children.
  • The Government should have taken a more precautionary approach to gambling advertising in general – particularly to minimise children’s exposure. While a complete ban on gambling advertising would not be appropriate, there is still scope for further regulation beyond that proposed by the Government. 
  • The Government should work with the Premier League and the governing bodies of other sports to ensure that the gambling sponsorship code of conduct contains provision to reduce the volume of gambling adverts in stadia. A higher proportion of gambling advertising in stadia should be dedicated to safer gambling messaging. The Government must require sports governing bodies to publish the code without further undue delay.  

Land-based gambling

  • Customers who prefer to pay on electronic gaming machines using cash should continue to be able to do so on all machines following any introduction of cashless payments. 
  • The Government must ensure that the new settlement arising from the review of the Horserace Betting Levy mitigates the impact of the White Paper’s reforms on the racing industry and ensuring British racing’s future. 

Gambling research, prevention and treatment 

  • The Committee supports the proposed structure and governance of the new statutory levy to be imposed on operators in the industry to fund gambling research, prevention and treatment. The Government must ensure that service providers currently operating via the voluntary funding system are adequately supported in the transition to a statutory levy. There should be a new national strategy for reducing gambling harms. 

A Gambling Ombudsman 

  • The scope of the new gambling ombudsman should include all disputes between gambling operators and their customers, not only those relating to social responsibility failings. 

Government has two months to respond.

Please get in touch if you would like discuss any of the proposals in the White Paper or would like any assistance preparing a response to the Gambling Commission’s current open consultations: the Autumn consultation, which includes proposals relating to incentives, customer-led tools, customer funds protection and regulatory returns reporting (closing 21 February 2024) and the December consultation on proposals relating to financial penalties and financial key event reporting (currently closing 15 March 2024).

Read more
06Dec

Andrew Rhodes’ speech at the CEO Briefing 2023: The beginning of a new chapter?

6th December 2023 Gemma Boore Uncategorised 169

The Chief Executive Officer of the Gambling Commission, Andrew Rhodes, delivered a speech on 8 November 2023 at the CEO Briefing 2023, an event organised by the Gambling Commission for C-level executives in the gambling industry to discuss progress with the implementation of the White Paper, share insights and explore current challenges.

This blog outlines the key themes from Rhodes’ speech, upon which we have been reflecting. It also highlights why, in our view, Rhodes is, by virtue of his plain-speaking leadership style at the Gambling Commission, making strides in improving the regulator’s relationship with its licensees, during an unprecedented period of change for the industry.

A more grown-up relationship

Rhodes opened the speech by reflecting on progress made since the Gambling Commission’s last CEO briefing (which we wrote about here). He acknowledged that the Gambling Commission “are seeing far less…extreme cases emerge from casework” in terms of player protection and commended operators and trade bodies for progress made. However, Rhodes made clear that more work has yet to be done:

“Last year I was clear that eliminating… …cases of extreme harm would lead to a new and – if anything – more challenging phase – how to tackle the more difficult issues where the balance between the licencing objectives and legitimate innovation, consumer choice and fair business practice is harder to define…

And all of that comes together in how we want the relationship between us, as the regulator, and you, as operators, to be if we want to continue to keep pace on the progress we have made over the last 12 months. A much more grown-up relationship where we can be transparent about the issues that matter and collaborative in how to address them.“

This message will be music to the ears of many because, for seemingly as long as anyone can remember, licensees have been complaining of being unable to engage constructively with the Gambling Commission.  If Rhodes can deliver on his promise of creating a more communicative and collaborative relationship between regulator and regulated, this can only be good for the industry and regulator alike.

It is very positive that this message is being delivered from the top-down. However, as we all know, even a well-led organisation is only as good as those on the ground and to truly deliver on his promise of cultivating a more “grown up relationship“, Rhodes will need to ensure that his message filters through the Gambling Commission’s licensing, compliance and enforcement divisions, with which the industry interact, with varying degrees of cordiality, on a daily basis.  

Praise where praise is due

Rhodes went on to reflect on the core messages he delivered at his speech at the 2022 CEO Briefing, noting that “last year I said we are still seeing too many of the extreme cases – the top of the chart – and that this was holding us back from grappling with those more complicated and harder to solve challenges”.

This year, the message to licensees was much more positive and represented a somewhat rare ‘pat on the back’ from the Gambling Commission:

“Now I’m not going to say everything is perfect now, but twelve months on we are seeing far less of those extreme cases emerge from our casework. The industry has made progress and I want to thank the many operators in the room today and your trade bodies for having worked with the Commission to achieve this step forward.“

Rhodes went on to note that the reduction in extreme casework will allow the Gambling Commission to start considering more complex issues. He hinted that this could involve the regulator gaining a better understanding of the issues faced by different types and sizes of operators, so it can better regulate a diverse industry with a dynamic customer base; and understand how technology can be used to “reduce reliance on manual processes” – even though human judgement will always be needed in some instances.

A more collaborative approach to tackling the illegal market

Rhodes also touched on the work the Gambling Commission has been doing to tackle the illegal, unlicensed gambling market in Great Britain. This is a topic on which we have extensively written (please see our recent blog here for example, which provides a checklist for licensees who find themselves contacted by the Gambling Commission regarding the use of their software or placement of ads by black market operators), so we will not repeat ourselves; but two statements made by Rhodes in the CEO Briefing are worth emphasising.

First, Rhodes noted in his introduction to this topic that he has often been misquoted regarding the risk of illegal gambling in Great Britain (which, as regular readers of other gambling publications will know, is quite true), and helpfully clarified that in his view (emphasis added):

“The risk of illegal gambling and the black market as an argument against reform of regulation is, I think, overstated, based on what we see in reality… …That does not mean there is no risk, as I have said many times. It does not mean there are no problems…“

Secondly, Rhodes explained that the Gambling Commission is hopeful it will soon begin seconding people from the industry to boost its insight and expertise in relation to tackling illegal, unlicensed gambling.  Again, this will be a welcome message for the industry, who have long felt that they have much to offer to help the Gambling Commission to carry out its functions in this important area – another indication that Rhodes will continue, during his tenure at the Gambling Commission, to do more to improve collaboration with industry stakeholders.

High growth operators to be under the spotlight

Rhodes also hinted in his speech that in the forthcoming year, the Gambling Commission will be focusing its attention on a slightly different category of licensee. Specifically, he explained that the Gambling Commission will be turning its sights to Tier 2 and Tier 3 operators, “particularly where they have grown rapidly”.

This is not because they see growth as a “bad thing” – but because it may be an indication that the business may be growing faster than the underpinning compliance infrastructure.

This is a valid observation and operators that fall into this category will be well-advised (if they have not done so already) to commence a review of their internal policies and procedures to ensure they continue to be both:

  1. fit for the business given its changing size, nature and/or customers; and
  1. regularly updated to reflect recent changes to the Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice and associated guidance; for example, in relation to remote customer interaction, a subject upon which we have extensively written – most recently, here.

To be or not to be bound by the Regulators’ Code?

Perhaps the most controversial section of Rhodes’ speech concerned his nod to the Regulators’ Code – and more specifically, his indication that the Gambling Commission does not consider itself to need to strictly adhere to these standards, which are intended to provide a “principles-based framework for regulatory delivery that supports and enables regulators to design their service and enforcement policies in a manner that best suits the needs of businesses and other regulated entities”.

In broaching the subject, Rhodes referred to “questions about the Gambling Commission’s adherence to the Regulators’ Code” (explored in some of our previous blogs, including this article), and went on, somewhat dismissively, to refer to the Regulator’s Code as “a seven page document written some years ago” that contains:

“a number of very sensible guiding principles for regulators, but it is meant to be just that – a sensible set of guiding principles – it does not try to cover the exact application of regulation in all circumstances.”

Rhodes went on to give some context to this statement by highlighting that the Gambling Commission’s role in regulating the gambling industry is to find an appropriate balance. For example, to find a balance between complying with its duty to aim to permit gambling, and consistency with the licensing objectives. Or, in terms of balancing the interests of the 22.5 million people that gamble in this country every year (44% of the adult population) with the risk that some of that cohort will experience harms from gambling.  

Although we agree that the Regulator’s Code is a set of guiding principles which requires the Gambling Commission to “choose proportionate approaches” to those it regulates based on “business size and capacity”, “minimis negative economic impacts of their regulatory activities”, it is much more than that and we suspect that this part of Rhodes’ speech is likely to stimulate future debate.

No one can reasonably argue that the man at the helm of the Gambling Commission does not have a difficult job, and Rhodes appears to be balancing the issues with which he is faced with gumption. However, it is clear that regulators such as the Gambling Commission must have regard to the Regulator’s Code when developing policies and operational procedures that guide their activities. This is not so dissimilar from the obligation the Gambling Commission imposes upon its licensees to have regard to the Gambling Commission’s formal guidance and advice under the Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice. If the Gambling Commission expects the industry to properly take into account its own guidance, surely it must practise what it preaches.

Swallowing a bitter pill

Next, Rhodes addressed the elephant in the room – the recent high-profile discussions regarding the introduction of financial risk and vulnerability checks and how these would impact the British horseracing industry.

Labelling it as “an exceptionally difficult and sometimes very bitter debate”, Rhodes disclosed that he has spent a lot of time meeting with and speaking to senior leaders in horseracing and groups representing punters. Despite this, Rhodes’ message was that it is not the job of the Gambling Commission to “consider or advise on the wider implications for any given sport – that is the role of the ”.

Rhodes went on to draw comparisons between the relationship between gambling and football vis a vis horseracing, commenting that many would “probably agree football would still happen even if people could not gamble on it”, but horseracing:

“is unique in its relationship with gambling and has a critical dependency on gambling as a funding stream. If less people lose money betting on horseracing, the income into horseracing goes down.”  

Despite this, Rhodes brought attention to the Patterns of Play research, which showed that out of the accounts used for horseracing bets, “the most profitable 1 percent from the operators’ perspective accounted for 70.4 percent of Gross Gambling Yield” – that 1% being a proportion five times smaller than the equivalent percentage for other types of sports betting; and that operators needed to take this into account when determining the financial thresholds to apply when assessing the risk of different customers’ spend.

Rhodes effectively therefore poured cold water on a campaign by the horseracing industry that there should be no checks at all on how affordable someone’s gambling is in horseracing. For example, in the recent petition presented to UK Government that has (as at the time of writing) accumulated 102,806 signatures (more than the 100,000 signatures needed to be considered for debate in Parliament), and which has recently attracted the following response from the UK Government:

“We are committed to a proportionate, frictionless system of financial risk checks, to protect those at risk of harm without over regulating….

….this petition raises the important link between betting and horseracing. The government recognises the enormous value of horseracing as both a spectator sport and through its economic contribution. The white paper’s estimate was that financial risk checks will reduce online horserace betting yield by 6% to 11%, which would in turn reduce racing’s income by £8.4 to £14.9 million per year (0.5% to 1% of its total income) through a reduction in levy, media rights and sponsorship returns.”

Rhodes’ comments and the Governmental response therefore confirm – perhaps to the dismay of signatories of this petition – that both the Gambling Commission and the Secretary of State are committed to rolling out financial risk checks – but that these will only be tested, trialled and rolled out when the Government and Gambling Commission are confident the checks “will be frictionless for the vast majority of customers”.

How precisely this will be achieved is a thorny issue. It is not yet clear what is meant by the phrases ‘frictionless’ or ‘vast majority’ and the interpretation of these words will be critical to ensuring that financial risk checks do not have unintended consequences for the gambling industry in Great Britain. We truly hope that the Government and Gambling Commission identify some innovative solutions  by the time the Gambling Commission’s response to its Summer 2023 consultation (which considered how financial vulnerability and financial risk checks would be implemented) is published in 2024.

Future developments

In concluding his speech, Rhodes highlighted two forthcoming developments:

  1. the Gambling Commission’s new three-year Corporate Strategy (due to be published next Spring), where they are “baking into it a focus on communicating clearly and building effective partnerships” which “will include engaging constructively with industry”, with a view to “reduc the reliance on formal enforcement”; and
  1. a one-day conference hosted by the Gambling Commission during which, similar to an event hosted in 2023, the Gambling Commission will invite collaboration with operators, academics and the third sector to discuss how to improve the evidence base in gambling and tackle the illegal market. The next conference in this series is scheduled for March 2024.

Finally, Rhodes reiterated the key message in his speech by calling on the industry to “commit to working together” as it will “lead to a better regulation, better outcomes and safer, fairer and crime free gambling across Great Britain”.

Our thoughts

Rhodes’ comments in the CEO Briefing, as well as his general approach since he has been appointed as Chief Executive Officer of the Gambling Commission, are encouraging and potentially signal the beginnings of a relationship between the Gambling Commission and its licensees. However, as they say: “the proof of the pudding is in the eating” and we will be closely watching to see whether Rhodes’ approach is reflected in the Gambling Commission’s work during 2024 – particularly in relation to its responses to the recently closed Summer 2023 consultation and recently opened Autumn 2023 consultation; and in its future enforcement action.

Next steps

If you would like to discuss Rhodes’ speech or any of the themes therein, please get in touch with your usual contact at Harris Hagan.

With credit and sincere thanks to John Hagan for his invaluable co-authorship

Read more
01Dec

White Paper Series: Gambling Commission launches Autumn 2023 consultation

1st December 2023 Harris Hagan White Paper 202

On 29 November 2023, the Gambling Commission launched its Autumn 2023 consultation (the “Autumn Consultation”). It is the Gambling Commission’s second consultation addressing its commitments within the White Paper, following the Summer 2023 consultation.

The Autumn Consultation sets out five proposed changes to the Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (“LCCP”) and Remote Gambling and Software Technical Standards (“RTS”), several of which were foreshadowed in the Gambling Commission’s Advice to Government in April 2023. These include:

  1. Socially responsible incentives

The Gambling Commission wants to make changes to ensure that incentives such as free bets and bonuses are constructed in a socially responsible manner and do not encourage excessive or harmful gambling. Proposals include banning or limiting (to a maximum of 1, 5 or 10 times) the use of wagering requirements in promotional offers and banning the mixing of product types (e.g. betting, bingo, casino and lotteries) within incentives for new and existing customers, as well as updating social responsibility code provision 5.1 of the LCCP to make it explicit that incentives should be constructed in a manner that does not lead to excessive or harmful gambling.

  1. Customer-led tools

The proposals include amendments to the RTS to ensure customers can seamlessly use pre-commitment tools (such as deposit limits) to maintain awareness and control over their gambling. The Gambling Commission is also seeking stakeholder views on: (a) minimising friction in the customer journey when they choose to use customer-led tools; and (b) cross-operator deposit limits, the prospect of which is sure to be a key area of focus in industry responses.

  1. Improved transparency on customer funds in the event of insolvency

The Gambling Commission is seeking to improve the transparency of operators who have a ‘not protected’ rating (under the Gambling Commission’s rating system) in relation to customer funds. It proposes an addition to the LCCP, to require licensees to remind customers, no more than once every 6 months, that their funds are not protected in the event of insolvency throughout the customer relationship.

  1. Changes to the frequency of regulatory returns

As we previously discussed, the Gambling Commission is proposing to amend the LCCP to require all regulatory returns be submitted on a quarterly basis.

Notably, the Gambling Commission states it will continue to engage with industry on the “final specification of fields for reporting” outside of the consultation process. We understand that this will be conducted through the Gambling Commission’s User research programme shortly, which we explained in a recent blog.

  1. Removing obsolete Gambling Commission requirements due to the Government’s upcoming statutory levy (LCCP RET list)

Running alongside the Government’s consultation on the statutory levy, the Autumn Consultation proposes to remove the current requirement to make an annual financial contribution to fund research, prevention and treatment (“RET”)  from the LCCP, once the statutory levy is introduced or at the beginning of the financial year in which the levy is introduced.

For further information about the statutory levy (and the Government consultation), please see our recent blog.

Other industry updates

The Gambling Commission explains that it is currently analysing the responses to its Summer 2023 consultation, which closed on 18 October 2023, and will release “one or more responses” to that consultation in 2024. It will also be launching another consultation on two “business as usual” matters shortly. This will include proposals addressing the clarity and transparency of the Gambling Commission’s calculation of financial penalties as well as licensees’ reporting of financial key events.

Next steps

The Autumn Consultation will be open for 12 weeks, closing on 21 February 2024. Responses can be submitted online, or by post to the Gambling Commission’s Policy Team.

We strongly encourage all licensees and stakeholders to review and respond to the Autumn Consultation. Please get in touch with us if you would like to discuss this matter further or require our assistance preparing responses.

Read more
26Oct

Andrew Rhodes’ speech at the International Association of Gambling Regulators Conference: A call for collaboration

26th October 2023 Adam Russell Event 200

The current Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) of the Gambling Commission, Andrew Rhodes, delivered a keynote speech at the International Association of Gambling Regulators (“IAGR”) Conference in Botswana on 16 October 2023. In this blog, we sum up the key messages from Rhodes’ speech, which was delivered to gambling regulators from across the world. Part One outlines Rhodes’s commentary on implementation of the UK Government’s Gambling White Paper, and Part Two summarises what was said regarding the Gambling Commission’s increasingly innovative approach to tackling black market gambling.

Part One: The White Paper

Background

Rhodes introduced the White Paper by stating that the Gambling Commission is “pleased to see so many of recommendations adopted”. He proceeded to describe “the publication of the White Paper an important moment”, citing the need to update the gambling regulatory framework with “evidence-based changes” to keep pace with digitisation in society.

Priorities

Rhodes acknowledged that “the White Paper is a key priority for the Commission”. However, he managed expectations by stating that “this will not be the work of a few months” given that the “Gambling Commission is either leading or supporting on the implementation of Government policy” in relation to “over 60 areas of work”. Rhodes then distinguished between priorities for the Government versus priorities for the Gambling Commission, the latter of which included to:

  • “ensure bonus offers and incentives do not lead to excessive or harmful gambling,
  • set further product controls for safer online games,
  • require operators to identify and take action for financially vulnerable consumers and to tackle significant unaffordable gambling through frictionless checks that are not disruptive for consumers.”

Rhodes noted that some of these themes would be common to all regulators at the conference and that while “attitudes, politics, regulatory frameworks and so on may be quite different”, human behaviour is similar cross-jurisdictionally, which may lead to “some commonality in the way approach these areas”.  

Prior and upcoming consultations

Rhodes confirmed that the Gambling Commission has received “over 2,300” responses to its first round of White Paper consultations and that those responses “can and will help us improve the changes we make to our rules and to how gambling is regulated in Great Britain”. He considered, however that there have “been some misunderstandings” in relation to financial risk checks, some of which he put down to the complexity of the issue the Gambling Commission is facing. However, according to Rhodes, in other cases, misunderstandings have arisen as a result of “deliberate misinformation designed to muddy the waters of debate and to torpedo the implementation of Government policy.” This is potentially (we think) a not-so-subtle reference to the open letter to Racing Post readers published in September 2023, in which the Gambling Commission complained that the Racing Post has been writing imbalanced stories about the financial risk consultation.

Rhodes went on to confirm that progress is underway on launching “the next tranche of consultations”, which will initially include:

  • socially responsible incentives (such as bonuses and free bets), and
  • gambling management tools (including online deposit limits and opt-outs),

with further consultations to follow in 2024.

Gambling data and the evidence base

Rhodes noted that besides consultations, the Gambling Commission is “leading on” improvements to “gambling data” and “the evidence base”. He mentioned that the Gambling Survey of Great Britain will launch early next year. It is set to be the “largest survey of its type” worldwide and attract around 20,000 respondents annually.

He proceeded to outline the “inherent conflict” in relation to the use of problem gambling data, particularly in the context of polarised debate. Rhodes noted that some may seek to cite a low problem gambling rate of between 0.3 percent and 0.5 percent of the population, at the same time as arguing that the same “sometimes limited” sample sizes create “insufficient evidence to support intervention in areas of higher risk”. Although this is contradictory, Rhodes acknowledged that the evidence base requires improvement and promised that the Gambling Survey of Great Britain would help to achieve this – with updated questions for the digital age and “predictable, regular data” for study.

With regard to the broader evidence base, Rhodes reiterated the six priority objectives which were set out in the Gambling Commission’s three-year evidence gaps paper, namely:

  1. early gambling experiences and gateway products;
  2. the range and variability of gambling experiences;
  3. gambling-related harms and vulnerability;
  4. the impact of operator practices;
  5. product characteristics and risk; and
  6. illegal gambling and crime.

Part Two: The black market

Background

In the second half of the speech, Rhodes explained that the Gambling Commission has been taking an increasingly robust approach towards the black market. As above, the tackling of illegal gambling is a priority area of the Commission’s three-year evidence gaps paper, published in May 2023. Rhodes emphasised that while the black market is an issue, it “is not a significant concern” due to the high rate of channelisation. Channelisation refers to the proportion of consumers who gamble in the licensed market in comparison to the illegal market.

Actions

Rhodes outlined some of the actions that the Gambling Commission has been taking to “disrupt unlicenced , illegal online operators through collaboration with others”, which has broadly involved “going upstream, further away from where formal powers begin”. This means working with others to intervene between illegal operators and British customers to “generally frustrate their business and force them out of the market”.

Rhodes gave examples of what this work entails:

  • increasing engagement with payment providers and financial institutions,
  • collaborating with internet search and service providers to delist illegal operators from search results and geo-block their websites,
  • working with social media companies to remove posts which promote illegal gambling,
  • cooperating with Gambling Commission software licensees to prevent access to products which appear to be available on illegal sites, and
  • engaging with Gambling Commission licensees where affiliates have placed adverts on illegal websites.

Results

Rhodes revealed that the Gambling Commission’s combative approach has:

  • “more than doubled the number of successful positive distribution outcomes”
  • “close down hundreds of illegal lotteries”
  • “stop influencers promoting unlicensed gambling.

Further, between May and July, Rhodes explained that geo-blocking had restricted access to four of the top 10 illegal domains, and there was a 46 percent reduction in traffic to the largest illegal sites.

The Gambling Commission also “block 17 sites from Google search results through collaboration with Google, and “remov payment facilities from illegal sites” through their work with Mastercard.

Next steps

Rhodes pledged to “continue to study the impact of interventions and respond accordingly”, and to “deepen collaboration with partners in industry, tech and finance” to further strengthen their disruptive capabilities.

Moreover, Rhodes revealed that the Gambling Commission would be holding a Conference in March 2024 to explore “how can work with partners to further decay, frustrate and drive out illegal gambling”.

Rhodes reflected that “strong collaboration with others”, including with other regulators, has been crucial to the results the Gambling Commission’s disruptive enforcement work has yielded so far. However, he wants to see further collaboration take place and urged other regulators to join him in forging and strengthening relationships.

Reflection

This is Rhodes’ second time speaking at the IAGR conference. His last speech, delivered in Melbourne in October 2022 at a time when the White Paper was still pending, appealed for gambling regulators to work better together; share data and evidence; adopt common approaches; and coordinate actions where possible.

This year, Rhodes recognised the role that collaboration has had in successful outcomes during the last year, including in relation to tackling illegal online operators, and reiterated his call for overseas regulators to “share notes” with the Gambling Commission on gambling operators that trade globally.  

Rhodes also emphasised that the Gambling Commission is “more than ready to work with ” – referring to a recent roundtable with nine US and Canadian jurisdictions as an example of the Gambling Commission “establish clear working relationships that will support all of us to be more effective”.

At the conclusion of the conference, IAGR members elected Ben Haden of the Gambling Commission as their new president. Mr Haden takes over the presidency from Jason Lane, the Chief Executive of the Jersey Gambling Commission.

Next steps

Please get in touch if you would like to discuss any aspect of this speech or if we can otherwise assist you.  You can find out more about the services Harris Hagan provides here.

This blog has been written on the basis of the published version of Rhodes’ keynote speech available here, which may differ slightly from the delivered version.

Read more
19Oct

White Paper Series: DCMS statutory levy consultation – polluters pay is the fairest way…

19th October 2023 Ting Fung Harris Hagan, Responsible Gambling, White Paper 186

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport’s (“DCMS”) consultation on the statutory levy (the “Consultation”) was published on 17 October 2023.

The White Paper stated that the Consultation would consider: 

  1. the proposed total amount to be raised by the statutory levy;
  2. how to construct the statutory levy in a fair and proportionate manner; and
  3. consideration of the differing harm associations between sectors and/or associated fixed costs, for example, whether a “polluters pay” principle should be adopted.

We set out below the DCMS’ response to these and other key points of the Consultation. 

Proposed total amount?

The Consultation indicates that the new gambling levy, which is expected to be in full force by 2026/2027, will raise an estimated £90 to £100 million per year for research prevention and treatment by 2027.

Construction of the levy

The levy will be calculated based on a percentage of gross gambling yield (“GGY”) and be applicable to both B2Cs and B2Bs. Where GGY is not applicable, percentages should be applied to gross profits instead.

Licensees with more than £500,000 GGY or gross profits will be expected to pay the levy.

Summary of proposed levy rates 

Levy rates (% gross gambling yield) when fully in force (2026/27):
• 1% from all online operators (excluding society lotteries with remote licences)
• 1% from remote software licences
• 1% from remote machine technical licences
• 1% from remote pool betting licences
• 0.4% from land-based casino/betting
• 0.4% from non-remote software licences
• 0.4% from non-remote machine technical licences
• 0.4% from non-remote pool betting licences
• 0.1% from land-based arcades and bingo
• 0.1% from society lotteries (including External Lottery Managers and local authority lotteries licensed by the Gambling Commission)

Government emphasises that it is “committed to a proportionate, evidence-led approach” and states that the proposed rates may change depending on evidence received from the Consultation.

Subject to the Consultation response, payment of the levy will be either with the annual fee or on a fixed date, with Government priority being a streamlined process for levy payment and collection.

Government recognises in the Consultation that online providers of higher-risk gambling products “are associated with greater levels of ‘problem gambling’ and gambling-related harm” and therefore “can also reasonably be expected to contribute more to cover the costs of tackling and preventing gambling-related harms”. Nevertheless, Government acknowledges that a polluter pays principle would currently be difficult to implement by product, as the evidence base is not yet sufficient to confirm the particular share of harm by product. In addition, Government’s view of B2Bs as “a crucial part of the broader supply chain fundamental to the industry as a whole” has resulted in the same levy being applied between B2Cs and B2Bs.

Levy distribution

Oversight by:

  • A central Government levy board comprising the Department for Health and Social Care and Department for Science, Innovation and Technology;
  • Additional oversight by HM Treasury;
  • An expert advisory group comprising public bodies with relevant expertise and the third sector will also be established to help prioritise how funds should be used.

Administered by: the Gambling Commission, as directed by Government.

The proposed percentage allocations across the areas of research, prevention and treatment (“RPT”) respectively are:

  • 10-20% to UK Research and Innovation for a Gambling Research Programme.
  • 15-30% for a co-ordinated approach to prevention, early intervention, and education across Great Britain.
  • 40-60% to the NHS, who will be the main commissioner of treatment in England, Scotland and Wales.

What about regulatory settlements and RET payments?

Subject to the final levy system, the Gambling Commission has indicated that it will review its process for approving the destination of settlements, should there be any, and consider how to avoid, as far as possible, a dual system or duplication of work alongside the levy.

Until the levy is implemented, licensees are expected to continue making RET payments as required by the Licence conditions and codes of practice.

Conclusion

Speaking on fairness, Gambling Minister Stuart Andrew has said that:

“Gambling firms should always pay their fair share and this new statutory levy will ensure that they are legally required to do just that.”

The Consultation lasts for 8 weeks, with a deadline of 14 December 2023. Responses should be provided via the Government’s online survey. If you cannot access the link, responses can be sent in PDF or Microsoft Word format to [email protected]. 

We encourage all to respond and let us know if you wish to discuss or require any assistance.

Read more
13Oct

Gambling Commission speech at G2E 2023: Growing importance of international collaboration

13th October 2023 Chris Biggs White Paper 195

Tim Miller, the Gambling Commission’s Executive Director for Policy and Research and Senior Responsible Owner for the White Paper, delivered a speech at the Global Gaming Expo (“G2E”) in Las Vegas on 10 October 2023. In his speech, Mr Miller discussed (1) the “growing importance” of international collaboration with other gambling regulators, (2) how this is assisting in tackling illegal online gambling and (3) the progress of the White Paper and changes to the law and regulations in Great Britain, which remains the largest licensed online gambling market in the world.

This blog, whilst not intended to be a comprehensive overview, will summarise those three key themes from Mr Miller’s speech.

Growing importance of international collaboration

Mr Miller stated that gambling is a global industry and that leading operators and suppliers are now (mostly) multi-national businesses. The Gambling Commission’s motivation to collaborate with international regulators has been piqued, as it witnesses more large British or European operators seek to establish themselves in North American jurisdictions.  Indeed, Mr Miller declared:

“Increasingly we regulate the same companies; we address the same risks; we face the same challenges.”

In an effort to provide clarity about what the Gambling Commission means by strengthening its relationships with other regulators abroad, Mr Miller explained that the Gambling Commission continues to look to support new regulators in burgeoning jurisdictions and learn from their experiences, suggesting:

“The more gambling regulators know of each other’s rules, standards and markets, the more we are sharing information and best practice, the more we support each other then the more effective we will be.”

Consistent with the Gambling Commission’s tough stance on compliance and enforcement (indeed, Mr Miller mentioned the Gambling Commission broke its own record for “the largest ever settlement” twice in the last financial year), Mr Miller also gave a clear warning for licensees who are non-compliant in one jurisdiction not to be surprised if they are “the subject of regulatory conversation in other jurisdictions.”

Further collaborative efforts mentioned by Mr Miller include:

  1. He, alongside the Gambling Commission’s Chair, Marcus Boyle, hosted a roundtable discussion at G2E with North American regulators on the practical steps the Gambling Commission will take to enhance regulatory collaboration;
  2. the Gambling Commission is close to concluding a number of Memoranda of Understanding with US regulators, which look to establish clear working relationships with those regulators; and
  3. the Gambling Commission continues to build stronger links between the North American Gaming Regulators Association and the Gambling Regulators European Forum.

Collaboration improving the combat against illegal online gambling

Mr Miller used illegal online gambling as an example of why international collaboration is important: what is illegal in one jurisdiction may not be in another, and some jurisdictions do not regulate online gambling at all. The key point made here is, as Mr Miller states, “legitimate, licensed operators from one jurisdiction can actually be the illegal or black market in another.” Tackling illegal online gambling is therefore a particular focus of the Gambling Commission and one which it relies on international collaboration to deliver greater results in making gambling safer, fairer and crime-free.

In terms of results, Mr Miller announced that by engaging and collaborating with payment providers, internet search providers and product and game developers, the Gambling Commission has delivered a 46% reduction in traffic to the “largest illegal sites coming into market.” Notably, Mr Miller indicated that the Gambling Commission’s Chief Executive, Andrew Rhodes, will be providing further information on this topic in a speech at next week’s International Association of Gambling Regulators conference.

Lastly, Mr Miller explained that the Gambling Commission continues to hold discussions with regulators in Europe and as far away as Australia to improve its response to illegal online gambling and influence on those outside of the gambling industry, declaring:

“The collective voice of gambling regulators across the globe pressuring big tech companies, banks and even some other jurisdictions to address the role they play in facilitating illegal gambling, will be much harder to ignore.”

Update on Great Britain’s changing regulations

Referring to the Gambling Commission’s first consultation following the White Paper released on 26 July 2023, Mr Miller indicated that the Gambling Commission has already received “thousands” of responses to these consultations. We strongly encourage stakeholders within the industry to respond to this consultation before it closes shortly on 18 October 2023.

Additionally, Mr Miller indicated there has been progress with the GamProtect project, which grew out of the Gambling Commission’s challenge to the gambling industry to produce a holistic view of risk of harm, known as the Single Customer View. Mr Miller indicated that the Gambling Commission has been working with the Betting and Gaming Council and the Information Commissioner to set up a pilot for this project and ensure the data gathered will only be used to protect people from harm.

Lastly, Mr Miller indicated that the Gambling Commission is finalising its new methodology for the collection of Participation and Prevalence data as part of the Gambling Survey of Great Britain. The Gambling Commission expects this survey (1) to have 20,000 respondents per year, (2) will be the “largest of its kind in the world when up and running”, and (3) will become the “new gold standard” of gambling data in Great Britain. Mr Miller stated the Gambling Commission is clear that “better data will lead to better regulation and better outcomes for both consumers and operators as a result.” As we have discussed previously, this is something we strongly support; better evidence and data should lead to better regulation, but time will tell.

Summary

Gambling is a global industry with global gambling businesses. The Gambling Commission’s desire to increase collaboration, especially against the backdrop of the Gambling Act Review and its previous speeches, is unsurprising. As Mr Miller acknowledged, “o regulator – regardless of their experience or scale can be the world police” for the gambling industry. Watch this space to see what increased collaboration amongst international regulators means!

Read more
22Sep

DCMS publishes correction to online slots consultation

22nd September 2023 Adam Russell White Paper 200

On 20 September 2023, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (“DCMS”) published a correction note in respect of its open consultation on the imposition of a maximum stake limit for online slots games.

Correction note

DCMS have made a correction to Chapter 5 of the original consultation document, within which it was incorrectly reported that, according to the Public Health England Gambling-related harms evidence review, problem gambling rates are highest in the 16 to 24 age group (at 1.5%). However, 1.5% is in fact the problem gambling rate for men in that age group, rather than all respondents. In actuality, the rate for all respondents in the 16 to 24 age group is 0.8%. According to the Health Survey for England 2018, the problem gambling rate in the 16 to 24 age category is 1.0% – which was the highest of any age group.

The timing of this correction is interesting, particularly given the open letter published by the Gambling Commission’s CEO, Andrew Rhodes, in August 2023, in which Mr Rhodes raised concerns about the misuse of gambling statistics. The accurate use of data, it seems, is becoming increasingly important for all stakeholders.

Extension to deadline for submission of responses

The original deadline for submission was 20 September 2023 at 11:55pm. In view of the correction made to Chapter 5, DCMS have extended the original deadline by two weeks, to 4 October 2023 at 11:55am. This is to “give respondents time to consider the correction and respond on this basis”.

Next steps

DCMS have advised that any respondents who wish to resubmit should email  [email protected] to do so.

Please get in touch with us if you would like to discuss this matter further or require our assistance preparing a response.

Read more
22Sep

White Paper Series: Regulatory Panel changes – Fair or unfair?

22nd September 2023 Bahar Alaeddini White Paper 194

In this blog, we consider the Gambling Commission’s most recent proposals to the Regulatory Panel.

It will not come as a surprise to readers that, as gambling lawyers, we have serious concerns about the proposals to:

  1. use Adjudicators with only a minimum of five years’ post qualification experience (“PQE”); and
  2. change the default from oral hearings to paper-based decisions subject to a fairness test.

Regulatory Panel and its importance

The Regulatory Panel provides an important opportunity for applicants and licensees to attend an oral hearing to challenge decisions made by Gambling Commission staff. It is the only avenue of recourse, outside the expensive options of the First-tier Tribunal and judicial review, when the Gambling Commission is going against you. Whilst we accept it is still, in fact, the Gambling Commission, it is an important accountability mechanism for Gambling Commission employees making decisions under delegated powers. This narrow and non-independent avenue of recourse should not be further eroded. 

2020 consultation

On 18 May 2020, the Gambling Commission announced planned changes to its Regulatory Panel, which included: (1) the recruitment and appointment of legally-qualified Adjudicators, solely for the purpose of sitting on the Regulatory Panel with the “presumption” they will also provide legal advice; and (2) reconstituting the quorum as follows: (a) for operating licences: one Commissioner and one Adjudicator; and (b) for personal licences: one Adjudicator.

At the time, we were so concerned by the proposals and that the duty to act fairly was being compromised that we submitted a response to the 2020 consultation and shared it on our blog to assist others in preparing responses.

More than 14 months later, on 21 July 2021, the Gambling Commission published its consultation response which summarised the 22 written responses received from gambling operators, trade associations and others, including Harris Hagan.  As explained in our August 2021 blog, The overwhelming majority of respondents disagreed with each of the Gambling Commission’s proposals, with a key concern being that “the independence and impartiality of the Panel would be adversely affected by the proposal to use adjudicators” as outlined in my May 2020 blog.

2023 consultation

The two main proposed changes are:

  1. Quorum and composition

The Regulatory Panel will no longer comprise up to two to three Commissioners, advised by an independent legal adviser. Instead, it will be chaired by a legally qualified Adjudicator sitting alongside one Commissioner and one senior Gambling Commission employee. The Adjudicator would sit alone on case management matters and personal licensing cases.

The main reasons for the proposed change are to improve availability, improve governance and accountability and provide an enhanced skillset for decision making.

Our main concerns are:

  • Adjudicators will, as proposed in 2020, be employed by the Gambling Commission. In a small feat of victory, we note from the draft Governance Framework (published this time as part of the consultation) the Gambling Commission has acknowledged some of our previous concerns by indicating that Adjudicators’ will be home-based and appraisals will be run by a Commissioner.
  • Adjudicators will only need a minimum of five years’ PQE. The idea that someone with potentially as little as five years’ PQE would be adjudicating on a £20m fine, suspension or revocation of a licence is frightening. Where is the Gambling Commission’s evidence to support that five years’ PQE is appropriate? How is this a sufficient level of experience, bearing in mind they are likely to have absolutely no experience of gambling and, given their lack of seniority, very minimal experience making unsupervised decisions? 
  • Unlike the 2020 consultation which failed to specifically mention other adjudication frameworks, this time, the Gambling Commission has made fleeting mention to the General Medical Council (regulates medical doctors), Ofqual (regulates qualifications, examinations and assessments) and Solicitors’ Regulation Authority (regulates law firms and solicitors) to support the move to a mixed model of decision-making. We remain wholly unconvinced by the Gambling Commission’s rationale. There are about 90 statutory regulators in the UK and yet the consultation includes no details, or evaluation, of the different models of adjudication and relative advantages and disadvantages (including appeal rates) of each model. Nor is there any reference to the determining factors for the chosen mixed model or the appropriateness of application to the regulation of commercial gambling. As with the 2020 consultation, we are left to assume this is deliberate given many of the other models appear impartial, independent and robust. By way of example, approximately half of the Financial Conduct Authority’s Regulatory Decisions Committee’s 18 members come from finance or financial services backgrounds. The other half have esteemed legal, governance, policy or academic backgrounds. Independence is further emphasised by the FCA handbook stipulation that: (i) none of the members are employees; and (ii) the committee has its own legal advisers and support staff.
  • The Principles of inspection and enforcement, as set out in Philip Hampton’s Reducing administrative burdens: effective inspection and enforcement report state: “egulators should be accountable for the efficiency and effectiveness of their activities, while remaining independent in the decisions they take setting out a number of core principles of effective regulation – the standard against which all regulators’ performance should be judged.”  At a minimum, the Gambling Commission must publish its research into each adjudication model and its evaluation criteria for monitoring the “efficiency and effectiveness” of each model, together with the impact on applicants/licensees.
  • There is no mention of a trial period of using Adjudicators.
  1. Default of paper decisions

Another proposal is to change the default from oral hearings to paper-based decisions. An oral hearing can be requested by the applicant/licensee; alternatively, the Panel itself may decide it is “required” – using a test of “fairness”, for example, where there are “material and significant disputes of fact”.

The main reasons for this proposed change are to reduce the burden on applicants/licensees particularly where they have unrepresented and find it difficult to navigate, and to increase the promptness of decision making.

Our main concern is that applicants and licensees will be denied the opportunity to bring their arguments to life.  What is the test of fairness and why do we need one?

The requirements of fairness are flexible and fact specific. Legal history places huge importance on oral argument and, in our view, with good reason. Over 20 years ago, Lord Justice Laws recognised “oral argument is perhaps the most powerful force there is, in our legal process, to promote a change of mind.” Further, in R (H) v Secretary of State for Justice EWHC 2590 (Admin), Cranston J summarised the legal position in respect of oral hearings as follows:

Procedural fairness sometimes demands an oral hearing. There can be greater confidence with an oral hearing that the relevant standards have been properly applied and that the facts on which the decision is based are accurate. The oral hearing also gives the person affected by the decision the opportunity to tailor the arguments to the concerns of the decision maker.

Another concern is the matter of mutual respect for the Gambling Commission and the applicant/licensee with the latter’s perception of the process being central, as acknowledged in Osborn v Parole Board UKSC 61, in which Lord Reid referred to the principle that:

…justice is intuitively understood to require a procedure which pays due respect to persons whose rights are significantly affected by decisions taken in the exercise of administrative or judicial functions. Respect entails that such persons ought to be able to participate in the procedure by which the decision is made, provided they have something to say which is relevant to the decision to be taken.

We feel strongly that the Gambling Commission’s proposals do not conform to the necessary standards of fairness. The proposed barrier should therefore be removed, and the policy should simply say that an oral hearing can be chosen on request. This will address the Gambling Commission’s main reason for the proposed change whilst still enabling those who want one, a fair hearing.

The consultation cites the stress that the unrepresented applicants/licensees experience in attending hearings as a reason for changing the default to paper decisions. However, there is no mention of how many of the 12 requests, to the Regulatory Panel, last year were unrepresented.  The Consultation is silent (no doubt, intentionally) on the introduction of a policy dealing with unrepresented parties.

Concluding thoughts

It is undeniable that the Gambling Commission is a very powerful regulator. How many other UK regulatory authorities can impose limitless fines, commence criminal proceedings and decide to close multi-million pound businesses? 

It appears that the Gambling Commission’s primary focus is to cut costs. Inevitably, good decisions will not be made in the public interest, nor will those decisions be made following a fair process. The new proposals will have a far bigger negative impact than announced changes in 2021, which will be implemented at the same time (as amended). The only possible – dim – glimmer of hope is that decisions will or should be quicker.  However, if those decisions are of poor quality and unfair, it means that they will be more routinely appealed to the First-tier Tribunal, which will be lengthy, uncertain and expensive. Therefore, any possible benefit gained from quicker decisions will be more than outweighed by the drawbacks.

If we look at the regulatory landscape, the Gambling Commission is proposing to make these significant changes at the same time as it is escalating fines and sanctions. 

Effective regulation requires effective accountability, and it seems to us that the Gambling Commission is removing a weakening mechanism which holds the regulator to account for its own policies and procedures and the law.

In conclusion, and repeating the final words from my May 2020 blog, the proposed changes do not offer a practical vision for adjudication that is consistent with good regulatory and legal practice. There is nothing to suggest that fairness has been a consideration. The only consideration appears to be about saving cost, time for the Gambling Commission and Commissioners, and speeding up the process. In doing so, the duty to act fairly has been compromised.

Respond to the consultation

We strongly encourage industry and its stakeholders to respond to the consultation, which closes on 18 October 2023.

Read more
  • 1234
in
Harris Hagan uses cookies to enhance your experience on our website. Please see our Cookie Policy for more information about the cookies and how to disable them. By continuing to use our website without disabling cookies, you agree to our use of cookies.OK