SBC News Voice of the Sports Betting Industry
A group of UK gambling harm treatment professionals, led by Deal Me Out (DMO), has raised concerns that a recent parliamentary hearing did not reflect the reality on the ground when it comes to gambling harm.
Writing to the Health and Social Care Select Committee, the gambling harm education prevention charity said that only a partial view of how gambling-related harms are treated was represented, and MPs have been misled.
On 2 April, the Committee heard views from public health professionals on a range of topics on 2 April including how funding for gambling harm treatment is distributed, what research should focus on, and the industry’s perceived influence on said research. The MPs subsequently wrote a letter to the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) calling for further reform.
In its own letter to the Committee, DMO stated: “Our main concern is the repeated assertion by Professors Heather Wardle and Sam Chamberlain, and Lucy Hubber that the gambling industry is somehow negatively influencing research and treatment of gambling harm. This is – at best – outdated, and at worst, fiction.
“To help address this imbalance we are providing accurate and updated information from the organisations at the forefront of treating and preventing gambling-related harms. We would be happy to brief you and Committee members to give you a full picture of the situation.”
The letter has been signed by Deal Me Out, BetBlocker, EPIC Global Solutions, EPIC Restart Foundation, Gordon Moody, the Player Protection Hub, IC360 as well as Regulus Partners.
The organisations all argue that critical work has been diligently carried out in harm prevention for many years during a time when there was little or no funding from the state, regardless of criticisms from committee witnesses.
“The idea that the industry has some sort of negative influence over them because it is providing money is absolute fantasy,” the letter explained.
A reappraisement of a framework upgrade
Until this month, the Gambling Act 2005 required all licensed gambling operators to donate to charities that work towards preventing gambling harms. Such financial contributions could only be made to organisations approved by the UKGC, and funding was allocated by GambleAware.
This is now replaced with the research, education and treatment (RET) levy, which operators will be mandated to pay into each year. It was intended that NHS England and GambleAware would distribute funds, but as the former is going to be disbanded this mandate will likely be taken on by another NHS body.
Regardless of these changes, concerns about gambling’s social impact continue, as seen when the Committee hearing warned against the normalisation of gambling. However, Deal Me Out argues that the majority of the population already view gambling as normal.
“It is only via the normalisation of gambling that we can hope to raise public awareness of the risks of gambling and the tools and strategies that can keep people safe,” the letter added.
The organisation described the people who do not view gambling as normal as anomalistic in their social views.
“Despite their good intentions they are amplifying the stigma around gambling harm and cutting off resources that could be used to reduce harm,” the letter argued.
“We reject the language of stigmatisation and argue passionately that the only way to fight the harm caused by gambling is for politicians, regulators, treatment services, researchers, those with lived experience, the media and the gambling industry to work together.”
Stakeholders also argue that the regular advancements in technology in the betting and gaming industry, and in the treatment of gambling harm, means that a more fluid approach is needed to soften any potential negative impacts.
The importance of education
At the hearing last month, Professors Wardle and Chamberlain claimed that there is a huge gap there in terms of education around identifying and preventing problem gambling. They also reiterated the argument that many existing treatment and prevention programmes are dependent on the industry for funding.
“We have seen that already with education in schools, often run by charities that are directly funded by the gambling industry through voluntary donations, and it’s quite concerning and they’re not evidence-based.”
Countering this, Deal Me Out detailed how organisations such as EPIC Global Solutions have been working with schools for several years to minimise the level of impact of gambling harms from an early age.
The charity highlighted how student and teacher satisfaction scores have been over 95%, explaining: “This education is age-appropriate, evidence-based and certainly not pro-gambling industry.”
“We are concerned that these misleading statements are creating a negative narrative undermining our vital, and often, life-saving work. The comments might be in contravention of parliamentary rules and certainly do not help those who are harmed by gambling. Those are the people who should be our biggest concern.”
As stated above, following the hearing, the Committee made a number of recommendations to the DHSC, including calling for a clampdown on advertising and more powers for local governments when dealing with the industry.
DMO’s letter shows that there is still a strong difference of opinion on this, however. Meanwhile, the ongoing debate shows that despite the Labour government’s commitment to seeing out the implementation of the White Paper, heated conversations are not going anywhere.
