Part 1: The UK – Covid-19 compounds contraction
further information on the success (or not) of any
mitigation measures that have been introduced.
Walking the regulatory tightrope
The trading statements and commentary from the
operators seen since the crisis began to unfold
in late March have been suffused with talk of
safer gambling and brim-full of explanations of
what the companies are doing individually and
collectively to alleviate concerns over increased
gambling by a locked-down population.
This has been led by the Betting and Gaming
Council (BGC), which initially in late March
issued a 10-point pledge action plan that set
out the “standards expected” from its members
at this time. The 10 points were standard
fare, including an increase in safer gambling
messaging, the promotion of deposit limits
and a ‘one-strike-and-you’re-out’ policy on any
affiliate breaches of the code.
Call and response
However, such has been the pressure from the
anti-gambling lobby, including open letters to the
press from members of the Gambling Related
Harm All Party Parliamentary Group (GRH APPG)
and from sports minister Nigel Huddleston
(and the accompanying and consistent social
media pressure), that the BGC was forced into
announcing further measures in a letter to the
minister.
Then, to follow that up, the BGC announced
towards the end of April that its members had
agreed to voluntarily suspend all TV and radio
advertising for at least a month. This was despite
the drop in gambling advertising spend in the
period and an absolute decline of 10% in the
volume of sport and casino advertisements.
But the GRH APPG wasn’t finished. Two days
after the BGC announcement, it issued further
demands suggesting there should be an all-out
ban on all gambling advertising. “Now that you
accept that gambling advertising is harmful, we
assume your members will continue to restrict
advertising after the lockdown period, if, as you
say, you are keen to do everything to protect
customers,” the letter said. Notably, it went
on to suggest that all forms of marketing of
gambling – including sponsorships, digital and
affiliate marketing – should be a part of this new
prohibition.
All this has been taking place against the
backdrop of further pressure from the Gambling
Commission, which in late March drew attention
to what it wanted to see from the sector, including
the recognition that consumer protection
“must be paramount”, that marketing must be
conducted responsibly and that compliance
with licensing must be adhered to. With a
barely concealed threat, the chief executive Neil
McArthur suggested the Commission would “step
in immediately” if it sees what it deems to be
irresponsible behaviour.
High hit rate encourages critics
One source pointed out that in terms of its own
stated aims, the GRH APPG had enjoyed a large
degree of success since last November when it
made its call for a £2 stake limit to be introduced
for online slot games.
The other measures called for last year
included a ban on credit bard gambling, which
was introduced in early April having only been
announced in January. But more than just that
one measure, the 10-point action plan, the further
measures on VIPs and the voluntary TV and radio
ad ban all featured in some form or another in the
GRH APPG’s November recommendations.
The obvious conclusion, perhaps, for those
who wish for further and harsher measures to be
introduced, is that they should keep on pushing.
With the wind in its sails, the GRH APPG might
view the alacrity of the manner in which the
sector – via the BGC – has moved on advertising
and other issues as encouragement to keep up
the pressure.
Early indications suggest this is exactly the tack
the critics will take. On the day after the advertising
announcement, in the House of Commons the
leading lights of the GRH APPG, including Carolyn
Harris, were quick to press home their advantage
with another slew of parliamentary questions
iGB Market Monitor • The UK and Sweden • May 2020 9