Are Operators Avoiding the APPG?

Posted by Harry Kane on Wednesday, September 18, 2019

Even when the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) announced the safeguarding vulnerable players was one of its core strategic objectives through 2021, few could have imagined the raft of regulatory measures that have been introduced since the beginning of 2018.

However, much work is to be done to prevent gambling-related harm in the UK, with several statistics highlighting the extent of addiction nationwide and its overall impact on society.

This issue was drawn into focus recently, after bosses from three of the UK’s largest operators pulled out of a meeting with the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) to discuss gambling-related harm. But what is the true extent of the problem in the UK, and are operators genuinely avoiding scrutiny?

The Facts – Problem Gambing in Numbers

We’ve undoubtedly seen problem gambling become increasingly prominent in recent times, as the iGaming market has exploded and players have had instant access to a wider range of online and mobile games.

The growth of social gaming has also created a significant issue, as individuals as young as 13 are able to access casino-inspired games and experiences without having to verify their identification.

In terms of adult problem gamblers, the most figures suggest that a record number of addicts were hospitalised and treated by the NHS during 2018.

Overall, in excess of 100 people were admitted due to a severe and pathological gambling addiction last year, with these individuals in need of sustained and costly treatment at the expense of UK taxpayers.

This also represented a 50% year-on-year rise in the number of addicts hospitalised in the UK, whilst the number has spiked dramatically when compared with the paucity of patients treated in 2000 when the World Health Organisation (WHO) first recognised gambling addiction as an official medical condition.

Even more alarmingly, the number of children classed as having a gambling problem is thought to have quadrupled to more than 50,000 in a little over two years.

According to a comprehensive study commissioned by the Gambling Commission in the UK, an estimated 450,000 children aged between 11 and 16 wager regularly across a number of different verticals.

This number is higher than those who are thought to have taken drugs, smoked or consumed alcohol whilst underage, whilst further estimates suggest that the number could well continue to increase in the near-term.

These figures are contested in some quarters, of course, whilst others have suggested that they’re not as clear cut as they initially seem.

However, whilst some may argue with the extent of problem gambling and associated harm in the UK, there’s little doubt that this is a significant issue that demands the attention of both regulators and operators alike.

Avoiding the APPG – Is This a Cause for Concern?

Whilst the UKGC is undoubtedly upholding its end and trying manfully to safeguard gamblers in the UK, there have been suggestions that individual operators are failing to follow suit.

This fear was borne out recently, when bosses from three of the UK’s largest gambling firms all pulled out of a meeting in which they were to be questioned by members of the APPG.

These questions were to pertain to the danger of online betting and gambling-related harm, and whether or not operators could do more to protect their customers on a daily basis.

The withdrawals undoubtedly infuriated MPs, particularly after they had been urged to quiz GVC Chief Executive Kenny Alexander on claims that Ladbrokes Coral allowed one punter to squander thousands of pounds despite him showing numerous signs of addition.

MP Carolyn Harris, who called the withdrawals ‘outrageous’, had copied Alexander into the email from the punter that outlined the incident, only for Alexander to withdraw from the meeting less than two days later.

The leaders of William Hill and Flutter Entertainment (formerly known as Paddy Power Betfair) followed suit by also withdrawing within a matter of days, creating an uproar within Parliament and reaffirming suspicions that operators aren’t fully focused on the problem in hand.

However, there’s no evidence to suggest that Alexander definitively avoided the meeting as a result of the email, whilst the GVC executive has also pledged to attend a separate hearing in the House of Lords.

In this respect, the MPs’ claims that these individuals are “cowardly” and “running scared” may be a little unfair, especially with William Hill’s Chief Executive Philip Bowcock citing commitments pertaining to licensing issues and shareholder meetings for his non-attendance.

The UK’s leading high street brand also pledged to send their online managing director Phil Walker instead, meaning that they would at least have a presence during the Parliamentary session.

Flutter’s Chief Executive of European operations (Dan Taylor) will also attend instead of CEO Peter Jackson, whilst the leaders of SkyBet and Bet365 are also committed to turn up.

With these points in mind, it’s unfair to say operators are not willing to engage with politicians on the topic of gambling-related harm, although they perhaps need to show a little more accountability at the very highest level.

The Last Word – Why Balance is Needed to Resolve the Issue

In some respects, it’s little wonder that operators are struggling to cope with the demands of responsible gambling.

After all, they’ve been allowed to operate for years in a completely progressive and relaxed marketplace, during which time they’ve developed lucrative and consistent revenue streams.

However, these streams have been gradually targeted and challenged during the last 18 months, from the controversial FOBT cap to the upcoming, 6% hike in the Remote Gaming Duty (RGD) payable by operators.

Now, brands and their management have been required to completely revise their core operational strategies, whilst simultaneously introducing new safeguards and complying with stringent regulatory measures.

This is bound to create a challenging period of transition for operators, who are tasked with both delivering returns to their shareholders and safeguarding their players and keeping them from harm.

This is a difficult balance to strike, and their failure to immediately achieve it doesn’t mean that they’re necessary prioritising bottom-line profitability over the health of paying customers.

So, whilst the frustration of MPs is understandable, it’s arguably unfair for Parliamentarians like Iain Duncan Smith to deride operators as being condemnable and complicit with rising rates of addiction in the UK.

Instead, it can be argued that operators need a little time to evolve their strategies and ensure that they’re compliant with the UKGC, whilst they must also be compelled to assume greater responsibility for the welfare of their players in the future.