What does the UK market hold in store for 2025?

Well, I think the headline is that it’s slow, but there has been a substantial amount of work by all of the relevant stakeholders. The White Paper itself had more than 60 proposals to be introduced through primary and secondary legislation, via changing commission licence conditions and through voluntary industry commitments. But I think overall, two years on from publication of the White Paper in April 2023, it’s fair to say all of the main stakeholders would have expected more implementation by now and the main reason for the delay was the early calling of the General Election by Rishi Sunak. That seems such a long time ago now and, with the change of power, there’s been a period in which the new Labour Government has understandably wished to think things over and decide upon its policy in relation to gambling.

Could you provide some details regarding the Gambling Act Review evaluation plan that the Gambling Commission and DCMS are currently leading, and how it’s actually going to work?

DCMS announced in December that they’re going to be working with the Gambling Commission to deliver a programme of work to evaluate the impact of the policy measures implemented following the Gambling Act Review. Now the Government recognises, as do I, the difficulty of attributing observed changes to any one policy measure in this complex piece of work, because all of these policy measures all have different time frames, different implementation processes, and evaluating the impact of individual and collective measures is going to be extremely difficult.

The National Centre for Social Research will be undertaking the evaluation. It will be looking at various policy measures and asking what the intended and unintended outcomes and impacts were, what was the contribution of DCMS and the Commission, how did the proposals contribute to reducing gambling harm, how and why did the proposals contribute to regulating the online and land-based industries more equitably? There’s a long list of questions, a long list of things they’re going to evaluate. They’re going to be helped in the process by a lived experience panel, which will work alongside the Gambling Commission’s lived experience advisory panel. There will be an evaluation advisory group, which is experts, researchers, evaluators, academics, to provide independent assurance for the key evaluations. I think that will get underway quite soon if it hasn’t already; you can expect the report in 2026.

And what I would say is it’s hard to disagree that it’s important to evaluate the impact of the policy measures implemented following the review, but it’s going to be incredibly complex… I hope they get it right and get the implementation right the first time around.

How important will the statutory levy and online slot stake limits be in tackling gambling harm?

The statutory levy is going to be very important in tackling gambling harm

I mean, how can it not be? It will take effect from 6 April. It will raise £100m ($126m) every year for the research, prevention and treatment of gambling-related harm. It will deliver certainty of funding to reduce gambling harm, which is critical to delivering results over a long period. We know that 50% is going to go towards NHS-led treatment, 30% to harm, prevention and 20% to research.

I ask: how can it not have an important effect? I think there are some caveats; it’s important that we see truly independent, expert and authoritative commissioning when it comes to distributing funds, that we see an effective and joined up master plan for the reduction of gambling harm, and that’s far from being fleshed out. We want to see the money spent wisely, with efficiency and not lost in bureaucracy; we don’t want to see money disappearing to elsewhere in the NHS when it’s intended for gambling-related harm. Importantly, I know the industry can be seen as a pariah by those involved in research and prevention, even treatment, but I’d also like to see a willingness on the part of those commissioning the work to engage with the industry, which has such a detailed understanding of the products that it provides and has so much data available to help researchers. I hope they engage with the industry with a view to delivering the best outcomes.

Staking limits: I hope they will reduce gambling harm, but I cannot help but feel they are a blunt instrument when it comes to preventing gambling harm and that it’s better to take a holistic view of individual customers, their personal circumstances and their spending. The limit on staking limits seems, to me, to be more of a political decision to bring online staking limits in line with those in the land-based sector. But I don’t see how it can be a bad thing. I’m just concerned that it may not have the positive effects that are hoped for. Perhaps this is one of those areas where the Commission and Government’s evaluation will be helpful.

Gambling advertising regulation has been a big topic around the world, including recently in Ireland after the passing of the Gambling Regulation Bill. How do you think this could change in the UK, especially regarding sports sponsorship and the effect it may have on the horseracing industry?

Gambling advertising has increased substantially since the Gambling Act came into force. There’s no doubt about that. And it has led to concerns about the impact of advertising on children, young people and the vulnerable. I’ve no doubt that it does have a disproportionate impact upon those that are experiencing problems with their gambling. If you’re trying to give up gambling and you’re confronted by a lot of gambling ads on TV, it’s going to make your journey more challenging; many people also find the advertising annoying and intrusive. But it’s important to remember gambling advertising is highly regulated in the UK through the CAP and BCAP codes; the Commission has licensing conditions, there are voluntary industry codes, we’ve got the whistle-to-whistle ban, safer gambling messaging – and from the end of next season, football shirt sponsorship by gambling companies will be prohibited by the Premier League.

But the ability to advertise legal, highly regulated products, enjoyed responsibly by many millions of customers, goes hand in hand with that: a high level of regulation enabling licensed operators to distinguish themselves from the illegal market and mitigate the risk of consumers finding their way to unscrupulous operators where they will not enjoy the protections available in the regulated market. Now, this is a debate that plays out in every jurisdiction, whether it’s Ireland or the US – legalising and regulating online gambling. The proliferation of the advertising heightens the visibility of gambling to those who may not otherwise frequent gambling premises or have any experience of it, but it doesn’t equate to a proliferation of gambling harm. We haven’t seen an escalation of gambling participation or problem gambling rates in the UK and the fact that gambling advertising may be ‘annoying’ to some is not a reason to prohibit it. So, any further restrictions on gambling advertising should be evidence-based. The White Paper did propose certain sensible gambling advertising reforms, for example, relating to bonuses and direct marketing.

Now, all that said, the consensus of opponents of gambling is that the White Paper reforms relating to gambling advertising didn’t go far enough, and it may be that the Labour Government feels stronger measures are required. Some people would like to see gambling advertising banned altogether. Gambling advertising may get caught up in wider restrictions in other sectors, for example, relating to unhealthy foods; it’s all very difficult to predict.

Personally, I would say that this area is already fundamentally well regulated and the Government has other priorities

In terms of horseracing, gambling and horseracing are inextricably interlinked and, as we saw from the Racing Post campaign relating to affordability, horseracing recognises that their fortunes are also inextricably intertwined. If the industry is restricted in its advertising, and if it’s restricted in its ability to sponsor sport, there is going to be less money flowing into the sport.

Do you believe we will see much change in terms of policy and regulation of the gambling industry under the Labour Government compared with the previous administration?

The White Paper was the product of many years of consultation and hard work by government. It was well received when it was published by all key stakeholders and had cross-party support. Everything I’ve heard since Labour came into power suggests they’re intent on implementing the White Paper reforms more or less as they are. Indeed, if it has any sense, it will. It has other priorities, things to be doing in government. I expect they will implement the reforms more or less as envisaged in the White Paper; but there may be some changes around the edges. They may want to do a little bit more on advertising.

The UK Budget announced in October showed no rise on gambling duties within betting and gaming. Can you see this changing in the future?

There may not have been a rise on gambling duties, but there was an increase in national insurance contributions. From those in the industry that I spoke to, this was every bit as serious as any rise in gambling duties. A rise in national insurance contributions hits gambling businesses as hard as businesses in other sectors.

We then got the statutory levy, which is a tax by another name, so any idea that the industry got off lightly in the Budget or in recent times from this Government is not true. That said, there is nothing more certain than tax. There will be rises in the future, but this is likely to be determined by macroeconomic factors.

As we all know from bitter experience, gambling is always considered a soft target if the Government decides it needs more money

Overall, what changes and developments do you envisage taking place over the next few months within UK gambling regulation?

I would envisage a major focus on the illegal market in the coming months, by both the regulator and industry, in a concerted effort to mitigate the risks posed to UK consumers relative to the licensing objectives. Those being prevention of crime, protection of the young and the vulnerable, and fairness to the consumer. I expect this topic to dominate the regulatory landscape, and the industry will be awaiting the outcome of the Gambling Commission review of supplier Evolution with great interest.

I think the introduction of the levy will be seismic, particularly in terms of research and prevention, given that free and effective treatment is already readily available. Thirdly, I very much hope the modest but critical modernisation measures for the land-based sector will be implemented and will give a much-needed fillip to a sector that has been experiencing challenging times in recent years, yet still makes a sizable contribution to the UK economy in terms of jobs, taxes and investment.