Q1 industry donation figures released by GambleAware have listed Gamesys Group as its highest donor for the period, having contributed more than half of the total £820,000 received by the charity.
Donating £450,000, Gamesys topped the list of the 144 donations received, with its Virgin Bet Limited subsidiary also contributing £5,224.
UK licensing requirements demand that all license holders should contribute 0.1% of their annual Gross Gambling Yield (GGY) directly to GambleAware, requesting those with an annual gross gambling revenue of less than £250,000 per annum to donate a minimum of £250.
The funds are used by the charity to help the development of initiatives targeted towards the prevention and treatment of problem gambling across the industry.
The list of donors consists of operators and suppliers in the industry, in addition to donations in the form of unclaimed winnings, dormant accounts and other funds.
Apricot Investments, the parent company of Microgaming, was the second-largest contributor after donating £40,000, followed by Betfred’s igaming subsidiary Petfre Gibraltar with a donation of £26,783.
In addition to the donations, a further £169,800 was pledged during Q1. Praesepe Holdings committed £84,000 to GambleAware, followed by 888 Holdings which pledged £50,000.
During Q1, the charity also received £8.8m in regulatory settlements from William Hill and Betway.
William Hill’s Mr Green division was penalised as part of the Gambling Commission’s targeted investigation into online casinos, with the commission imposing a £3m penalty after the operator ‘failed to have effective procedures aimed at preventing harm and money laundering’.
Meanwhile, Betway was ordered to pay £5.8m ‘in lieu of a financial penalty which will be directed towards delivering the ‘National Strategy to Reduce Gambling Harms’.
This week, GambleAware trustees defended the charity’s funding structures, following concerns raised by the House of Lords Select Committee’s ‘Time for Action’ report – in which GambleAware was ordered to fix its ‘anomalous system’ which could impact funding of new RET programmes.
Defending the charity, trustees stated that GambleAware held no influence on how treatment providers secured further funding beyond central contributions. GambleAware underlined that all records of its RET donations and contributions had been tracked and approved by DCMS and the UK Charities Commission.