UK LEGAL COMMENT
gambling rates reduced following the new requirements, due to changes in survey methodology. When it comes to the Commission’s proposals for evaluating
the impact of the White Paper reforms, what we know from David Taylor’s post is that the Commission and DCMS have jointly procured NatCen to help them to “design a framework outlining options for process and impact evaluations, practical recommendations for implementing our evaluations, and data required to monitor and evaluate outcomes and impacts”. This “could include identifying opportunities for conducting evaluation trails once final policy positions and implementation dates are decided on”. As well as conducting the missing research for the credit card
ban evaluation, NatCen is also the body responsible for the Commissions new Gambling Survey for Great Britain. The findings from the experimental stage of this project included problem gambling rates of around 10 times higher than the Commission’s previous methodology and the NHS Health Survey. In his independent review of the new survey methodology, Professor Patrick Sturgis commented that “Until there is a better understanding of the errors affecting the new survey’s estimates of the prevalence of gambling and gambling harm, policy-makers must treat them with due caution, being mindful to the fact there is a non-negligible risk that they substantially over-state the true level of gambling and gambling harm in the population.” These comments do not inspire great confidence as to NatCen’s ability to design a framework for accurate and effective evaluation of the White Paper measures, particularly when it comes to assessing their impact on rates of problem gambling. In its evaluation of both the credit card ban and slots design
changes, the Commission seems to have focussed on the lack of evidence of unintended consequences to reach conclusions that the measures were successful. One crucial unintended consequence of increased regulation is, of course, the decision by customers to use unlicensed operators rather than those regulated by the Commission. In its evaluation of slots design changes, the Commission concluded that “there is no evidence of displacement to the offline or unlicensed illegal market” however it is unclear what assessment (if any) of such
displacement was carried out. Concluding there is “no evidence” is very different to concluding that some research was completed and a lack of displacement discovered. The difficulty in measuring any displacement to the unlicensed
market resulting from the regulatory changes arising from the White Paper is a serious problem. Other regulators, notably those in Sweden and Denmark, have made significant efforts to measure and track rates of channelisation than the Commission. In Great Britain, the best estimate we have arguably comes from the independent Yield Sec findings, which indicate the black market is growing rapidly. The Commission has so far not included questions in its various surveys to establish to what extent respondents gambling with licensed or unlicensed sites, or their awareness of the regulated status of the sites they use. In the absence of an official baseline figure, it remains to be seen if and how the Commission or DCMS will assess the impact of new measures on channelisation. Both when it comes to the creation of new regulations and to the
evaluation of those, it is true to say that good intentions do not always lead to good results. For the evaluation of the new measures to be effective, it must be a meaningful evaluation, it must be objective, and it must avoid the temptation to put a positive spin on the results. The Commission plans to provide further details of its evaluation approach through policy consultations, consultation response documents and through publishing other updates.
Melanie is a gambling regulatory lawyer with 13 years’ experience in the sector. Melanie advises on all aspects of gambling law including licence applications, compliance, advertising, licence reviews and changes of control. She has acted for a wide range of gambling operators including major online and land-based bookmakers and casinos, B2B game and software suppliers and start-ups. She also frequently advises operators of raffles, prize competitions, free draws and social gaming products. Melanie has a particular interest in the use of new technology for gambling products and novel product ideas.
APRIL 2024 23
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56
