The Culture, Media and Sport (CMS) Committee has written to the Gambling Commission regarding the latter’s decision to go ahead with Financial Risk Assessments (FRAs).
It is the latest in a series of unwinding events which have followed the Commission’s FRA revelations on Tuesday morning.
The Commission and Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) have both faced criticism from horse racing representatives and from Conservative MPs for not taking the issue to parliament.
CMS Committee Chair, Dame Caroline Dinenage MP, set out five key questions in a letter addressed to Sarah Gardner, Acting Chief Executive Officer of the Gambling Commission.
CMS Committee’s questions to the Gambling Commission:
1. Will the Commission publish the full dataset, evidence base and methodology that informed its decision to proceed with Financial Risk Assessments and to determine the proposed thresholds?
2. The Commission has stated that Financial Risk Assessments should reduce the need for document checks for most consumers. Can you provide an estimate of whether these changes will result in more or fewer recreational bettors being asked to provide documents or other financial information, compared with existing arrangements?
3. Some stakeholders have told the Committee that engagement by the Gambling Commission throughout this process has been insufficient. Could you set out in detail the consultations, meetings, pilots and other engagement activities undertaken with operators, consumers, sporting bodies and other stakeholders during the development of these proposals?
4. The Commission has announced that implementation groups will be established over the summer to support the next phase of delivery. Could you explain how decisions have been made regarding participation in those groups, including the criteria used to select invitees and the organisations that will be represented?
5. Stakeholders have informed the Committee that there may be no representation from the racing industry within these implementation groups. If this is the case, could you explain the rationale for that decision and how the Commission intends to ensure that the views of the racing sector are taken into account during implementation?
Industry condemnation of the Commission’s plans has been widespread over the past few days.
Law firm Kingsley Napley, the Betting and Gaming Council (BGC), renowned racehorse trainer John Gosden, the British Horseracing Authority (BHA), and many social media figures are just a few who have hit out at the plans regarding their implementation.
It is not something that has come out of nowhere, though. Figures including broadcaster Matt Chapman, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage and Social Market Foundation (SMF) Senior Fellow James Noyes had all previously urged the Commission to revise its plans.
With the CMS Committee being responsible for scrutinising decisions made by the the DCMS, this letter is no real shock.
The DCMS set the foundational policy direction for FRAs in its 2023 Gambling Act Review White Paper and have supported the Commission throughout the decision process.
It is the Gambling Commission that the CMS Committee has addressed, though, given the regulator still holds power over the methodology, execution and implementation of FRAs.
“It’s important that people at risk of gambling-related debt receive appropriate support,” said Dame Dinenage.
Credit: UK Parliament
“At the same time any regulatory change must recognise the significant economic contribution made by the industry.
“The Gambling Commission needs to be clear about how the assessments will work and should work closely with bookmakers to ensure new obligations do not impose undue burdens on responsible businesses.”
The CMS Committee has requested a response from the Commission by 24 July – two weeks today.
