The House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee (CMSC) has written to the Gambling Commission demanding answers on the planned introduction of financial risk assessments, known as affordability checks, for gambling customers. The cross-party committee's questions, which require a response by 24 July, closely mirror those raised by the racing industry since the policy was first proposed in late 2020.
Key questions posed by the committee
The CMSC is asking whether the Gambling Commission will “publish the full dataset, evidence base and methodology that informed its decision to proceed” with the checks. It also seeks clarification on whether the checks will result in “more or fewer recreational bettors being asked to provide documents or other financial information, compared with existing arrangements.” Additional concerns include insufficient engagement by the commission with stakeholders and potential lack of representation from the racing industry in implementation groups.
Dame Caroline Dinenage MP, chair of the CMSC, stated: “It is important that people at risk of gambling-related debt receive appropriate support. 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.”
Racing industry frustration
The British Horseracing Authority (BHA) has expressed increasing frustration over what it perceives as the Gambling Commission’s reluctance to engage during the piloting and launch of affordability checks. Last week, the commission announced a “staged” approach to introducing checks, without a precise timeline, which the BHA views as a unilateral decision. Brant Dunshea, BHA chief executive, called it “a clear abdication of duty by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, which has failed to grip this process or properly consider the damaging consequences.”
Dunshea reiterated the BHA’s belief that the checks will drive customers to the illegal market, increasing gambling-related harm and reducing tax revenue for the Treasury. The BHA even submitted a freedom of information (FOI) request to the commission seeking data on the pilot scheme, which the commission reportedly dismissed as “vexatious.”
Background and ongoing debate
The affordability checks debate has been ongoing for over five years, with racing punters reporting intrusive requests for payslips and bank statements from operators. Operators claim these checks are required under current legal obligations, but there has been no clarity on criteria or whether casino and online slots players are subject to similar scrutiny. Dr James Noyes, an early proponent of checks, has joined calls for a pause to allow evaluation of a pilot scheme.
A Gambling Commission spokesperson said: “We take engagement with Parliament and its select committees incredibly seriously. We keep Parliament and the DCMS select committee updated on our work and of course we will be responding to Dame Caroline Dinenage’s letter by 24 July.”
