The Gambling Commission has written to the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport giving its advice on what should be done about maximum stakes and prizes for gambling machines. The Secretary of State is expected to announce the Government’s response to the Triennial Review of Stake and Prize Limits over the summer. The Gambling Commission’s advice is disappointing to those of us who have recommended that there should be greater controls on Fixed Odds Betting Terminals (FOBTs, officially known as category B2 machines), either by removing them from high street betting shops altogether or by drastically reducing maximum stakes to bring FOBTs more into line with other categories of gambling machine.

The Gambling Commission makes encouraging noises about adopting ‘the precautionary approach’ which is set out in its own Statement of Principles for Licensing and Regulation of September 2009. It is good to learn that, ‘in interpreting the available evidence, the Commission will take a precautionary approach. For example, caution may be justified where evidence is mixed or inconclusive, and the Commission would not want to restrict its discretion by requiring conclusive evidence that something was unsafe before taking measures to restrict it’ (paragraph 4). They could imagine circumstances in which a case could be made for ‘some prudential restrictions being imposed’ on stake and prize limits (paragraph 12). There is an even clearer statement about ‘the precautionary principle’ in the advice which the Commission received on the issue of maximum stakes and prizes from the Responsible Gambling Strategy Board (RGSB) in June: ‘the essence of the precautionary principle is that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm, but there is no scientific agreement that it is actually causing harm, then the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those wishing to promote that product... [It] shifts the burden of proof away from the regulator having to demonstrate potential harm towards the hazard creator having to demonstrate an acceptable level of safety’ (paragraph 11.4).

Despite those encouraging statements, both the RGSB in its advice to the Gambling Commission, and the Gambling Commission in its advice to the Secretary of State, conclude that there is insufficient evidence to recommend taking any action about B2 machines at the moment. They recognise that the high maximum stakes on such machines does mean that comparatively large amounts of money can be lost in a short time and that there is justified concern about them. What is surprising is the lack of any attempt in either of these advice documents to review, or even refer to, the evidence that Gambling Watch UK and the Campaign for Fairer Gambling have drawn on in their evidence to the Government Consultation on stakes and prizes and which has figured prominently in the media in recent months, including the Channel 4 Dispatches and BBC1 Panorama TV programmes. For example, neither the Gambling Commission nor RGSB make any reference to the secondary analysis of the 2010 British Gambling Prevalence Survey which estimated that 23% of takings from B2 machines come from people with gambling problems (published in the journal International Gambling Studies, and see also this website: Research/People with Gambling Problems Are Making a Massive Contribution to Gambling Profits). This is all the more surprising in the case of the Gambling Commission advice to the Secretary of State, since it refers several times to the need for exactly that kind of estimate, and in that context refers to an estimate made by the Australian Productivity Commission for high-stakes gambling machines in Australia (paragraphs 14, 16, 22). The RGSB advice refers specifically to a Gambling Commission consultation with an international panel of machine experts which ‘produced a consensus that high-stakes machines were associated with problem gambling’ (paragraph 9.4). But it immediately dismisses the conclusion that such machines are dangerous on the grounds that this could be explained in terms of problem gamblers being particularly attracted to such machines rather than the characteristics of the machines themselves creating problems. They also fall back on the familiar argument that B2 machines are not a new product; if they were, they would be more inclined to invoke the precautionary principle (paragraph 11.6). But that completely ignores the way in which these machines were introduced into high street betting shops only a few years ago using a loophole in the law followed by a negotiated agreement with the weak Gaming Board in the years immediately before the 2005 Gambling Act.

One of the recurring themes in both the Gambling Commission and RGSB documents is the wish to see greater use made of industry data about the details of gaming machine play. Indeed the RGSB advice document reads more like a case for using such data than a review of current evidence relevant to immediate decisions to be taken about stakes and prizes. There is clearly a belief on the part of both organisations that the future, when it comes to evidence relevant to policy regarding gambling machines, lies with working alongside the industry to make maximum use of industry-held data about player behaviour. Such data are seen as offering boundless opportunities for analysing player data, predicting problematic gambling, providing individualised advice messages and evaluating the effectiveness of attempts at harm minimisation. By comparison all other forms of evidence are treated with suspicion since they do not assess ‘real gambling’ (RGSB paragraph 10.2) behaviour. A lot of hope is vested in the current scoping study, funded by the Responsible Gambling Trust, which is looking at the feasibility of collecting these kinds of data. This will not only strike many as being over-optimistic, but it also reflects a very narrow approach to policy-relevant evidence which should come from a number of different directions.

One has got to be worried about where these ideas are coming from and whose interests they really serve. There is little acknowledgement in the RGSB document about the source of their ideas about player behaviour data, until comparatively late on in the document (paragraph 10.16) when it is acknowledged that a large amount of the relevant work on this has been undertaken by the Division of Addictions at Harvard. What they fail to say is that this is the group that has become notorious in the USA for working very closely with the gambling industry and which has been widely criticised on grounds of conflict-of-interest and bias (see for example the book by Natasha Schüll reviewed on the Gambling Watch UK website: Important New Book about Machine Gambling). What is of concern to us in the UK now is that these ideas are being strongly promoted by the influential RGSB, which is itself not independent of industry interests. Further troubling is the way in which the Gambling Commission, set up by Government and required to advise it on relevant policy matters, draws so heavily on RGSB advice, agreeing with it in almost every particular and following its lead regarding the relative value of particular forms of evidence.

It is interesting that these documents have been made public in the very same month in which the Government has come in for criticism from many quarters for giving in to lobbying from Big Alcohol and Big Tobacco by pulling back from commitment to minimum unit alcohol pricing and plain tobacco packaging. If Government refuses to use the precautionary principle when it comes to the widespread concern about, and evidence of harm caused by, high stake gambling machines, then accusations of giving in to lobbying by Big Gambling can be added to the list.

This comment was minimized by the moderator on the site

Speaking as an addict myself whom lost his family and home and was forced to sleep homeless in a car until no second night out rescued me and after some weeks got me a place to live at YMCA and I am very grateful, after a few weeks I noticed many...

Speaking as an addict myself whom lost his family and home and was forced to sleep homeless in a car until no second night out rescued me and after some weeks got me a place to live at YMCA and I am very grateful, after a few weeks I noticed many others were made to be homeless as they had suffered the same fortune being a machine junkie. This was two years ago and since have got my family back I work and try to do my best meaning I hardly ever gamble its very hard I really hope they limit the stakes and fast.

99% of people that play these machines regularly are addicts, the machines and there games to the eye look simple enough, in comparison to online gaming you might say the two are alike this is part of there smoke screen, FOBTS are extremely complex the animations produced and sequence of wins and losses are unlike any other software generated roulette game on the internet and if you were to visit any of the websites the bookmakers own you will not see any of the software you are familiar with in there premises. I urge people to really look into the way the complicated software on FOBTS effect the brain, the software on these machines has been deliberately programmed to be highly addictive in many forms. I also believe these machines to be unfairly biased to the player even though the player is constantly reminded the opposite.

Read More
Messysc
This comment was minimized by the moderator on the site

agree with yorkie,
these spin machines create misery
disagree with one thing though , these so-called "Bookies" do care, as they and their shareholders are the beneficeries , remember, every cloud...

graham
This comment was minimized by the moderator on the site

THE ANSWER IS SIMPLE - BAN FOBTS!- THEY SHOULD NOT BE IN BOOK MAKERS / BOOKIES. IF SOMEONE WISHES TO PLAY THE AWFUL MACHINES THEN GO TO A LAND BASED CASINO WHICH IS HIGHLY REGULATED AND MONITORS EACH AND EVERY PERSON ENTERING THEIR PREMISES....

THE ANSWER IS SIMPLE - BAN FOBTS!- THEY SHOULD NOT BE IN BOOK MAKERS / BOOKIES. IF SOMEONE WISHES TO PLAY THE AWFUL MACHINES THEN GO TO A LAND BASED CASINO WHICH IS HIGHLY REGULATED AND MONITORS EACH AND EVERY PERSON ENTERING THEIR PREMISES. BOOKIES CANNOT DO THE LATTER AND HENCE PROBLEM GAMBLERS (EVEN THOSE THAT HAVE SELF EXCLUDED) COME BACK AGAIN AND AGAIN AS EASY ACCESS AND BOOKIES DON'T CARE.

Read More
Yorkie
There are no comments posted here yet

Leave your comments

  1. Posting comment as a guest.
Attachments (0 / 3)
Share Your Location
Type the text presented in the image below

Latest UK News

Parliamentary group lambasts online gambling

05 Dec 2019

The All-Party Parliamentary Group for Gambling Related Harm (APPG-GRH) has produced an Interim Report into the Online Gambling Sector which does not mince...

Political parties pledge gambling reform

05 Dec 2019

All four main political parties going into the December 12th general election make specific mention of gambling in their manifestos. Congratulations to...

'The Gambling Establishment' is published - a must read

18 Sep 2019

An important new book will be out in a few days time: The Gambling Establishment: Challenging the Power of the Modern Gambling Industry and Its Allies, by Jim...

The tide is turning against the gambling industry

09 Aug 2019

Great BBC TV programme available online at bbc.co.uk/bbcthree from 4 July 2019. Comedian Lloyd Griffith fails to double his money during a week of gambling,...

Gambling with Lives launch shows the tide is turning

17 Nov 2018

Tuesday this week, 13th November 2018, was the launch of Gambling with Lives (GwL) at the Houses of Parliament. The event was extremely well attended by...

Gambling with Lives

16 Aug 2018

Gambling with Lives (GwL) is a new group started by the parents of a young man with a gambling addiction who committed suicide. They are naturally grief...

FOBT Stake Cut to £2 Maximum

17 May 2018

The Government has at last seen sense and done what we and so many others have been asking for. Today it has announced it is bringing the maximum stake per...

What do you think about online gambling marketing: Gambling Commission wants to know

13 Feb 2018

The Gambling Commission (GC) has announced that it is working with the Competition and Markets Authority to make sure that online gambling companies bring...

Government's disappointing consultation document regarding FOBTs

01 Dec 2017

Several months later than originally expected, DCMS – which meanwhile has become DDCMS, Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport – has produced, not...

Gambling: a big public health problem neglected

15 Sep 2017

The Gambling Commission has just published a summary of British survey findings for 2015. The results are not new but this is the first time they have put...

TV drama shows gambling machine addiction

01 Jul 2017

The problems associated with the kinds of gambling machines now to be found in betting shops throughout Britain’s towns and cities, tending to be concentrated...

Are we seeing a backlash against liberalised commercial gambling?

05 Jun 2017

I have seen a couple of signs just recently that the tide might be turning against the establishment assumption that a strong, innovating and widely...

Gambling problems are costing Government hundreds of millions

13 Jan 2017

An important report came out at the end of 2016. This was from the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), an influential and progressive British...

What shall we say to the Government enquiry on Fixed Odds Betting Terminals?

07 Nov 2016

Good news! Well maybe, let’s wait and see what the actual outcome is. But we do welcome the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) putting out a...

Honest admissions by prominent gambling establishment figure

11 Aug 2016

Gambling Commission’s former Chair talks at the Royal Society of Arts (RSA)   Following his five years as Chair of the Gambling Commission, Philip Graf was...

The Times highlights gambling problems

23 Mar 2016

Did you see the Times of 17th February which devoted part of its front page, a whole double-page spread and an editorial to gambling and specifically the FOBT...

British gambling policy: Business As Usual for 2016

18 Jan 2016

Are there any signs that British gambling policy is changing for the better? Two recent public meetings might suggest some cautious optimism. One was a...

Jim Orford from Gambling Watch UK talks to George Galloway

16 Feb 2015

George Galloway and his wife Gayatri wanted to know how gambling has been allowed to get so out of hand. In this interview Jim gives them an overview of how...

Labour Party's sports betting levy idea criticised

18 Aug 2014

The idea behind the Labour Party’s consultation document ‘More Sport for All’, recently announced by Harriet Harman, Labour’s Shadow Culture Secretary, is...

World Cup betting: Should we be concerned?

13 Jun 2014

The World Cup from Brazil is on and like many others I shall be keeping an eye on the television to follow the progress of England and others. When I do I...

Betknowmore UK - a new social enterprise

25 Mar 2014

Betknowmore UK is a new non-profit, social enterprise. Our mission to to develop and deliver new, innovative, support services, to tackle issues around...

Children and young people: government and industry failing to protect

16 Oct 2013

One of the better established facts, based on research carried out in several countries, is that young people are especially vulnerable to problem gambling....

Local authorities helped to control betting shops

19 Sep 2013

The main railway station in Birmingham, where I live and work, is undergoing major renovation. Its new main entrance was opened earlier this year. Directly...

The Gambling Commission fails to apply its own precautionary principle in its advice about FOBT stakes and prizes

19 Jul 2013

The Gambling Commission has written to the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport giving its advice on what should be done about maximum stakes and...

Irresponsible statement by Chair of Responsible Gambling Trust

21 Mar 2013

Gambling Watch UK has been critical of the Responsible Gambling Trust (RGT) since its launch in April 2012. For a start we think that this way of deciding how...

Gambling and Alcohol, Parallels and Shared Solutions: a New Report

21 Feb 2013

A Losing Bet? Alcohol and Gambling: Investigating Parallels and Shared Solutions, a report by Alcohol Concern and the Royal College of Psychiatrists There is...

Government fails to deal with Fixed Odds Betting Terminals on the high street but resists the Select Committee’s call to make them even more available

21 Jan 2013

On January 15th, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) published the Government’s response to the July 2012 CMS Select Committee’s report into...

New Gambling Research focuses on Irresponsible Players rather than Dangerous Gambling Products

05 Dec 2012

Gambling Watch UK has already been critical of the Responsible Gambling Trust (RGT) as a gambling industry-led body which disburses funds for gambling...

The gambling industry levy: £25 million would be a more appropriate target

31 Oct 2012

The industry levy: £25 million would be a more appropriate target for the annual contribution of the British gambling industry to research and treatment. The...

Social Work is Neglecting Problem Gambling

26 Oct 2012

Social Work is Neglecting Problem Gambling  It is now well established that problem gambling is linked to many individual and social problems including;...

'Hard' FOBT gambling: alarming and illogical recommendations from the Culture, Media and Sport Committee

12 Sep 2012

Gambling Watch UK, like others, was waiting with interest to see what this report on the workings of the 2005 Gambling Act had to say about Fixed Odds Betting...

Channel 4 Dispatches puts the spotlight on FOBT machines and betting shops

07 Aug 2012

The harm being done by the Fixed Odds Betting Terminals and the clustering of betting shops in poorer areas came across clearly in last night’s Channel 4...

FOBT Machine Gambling Starts to get the Publicity it Deserves

29 Jul 2012

SCHOOL kids as young as 16 are gambling illegally in high street bookies, a Sun investigation has revealed. We sent a team of 16 and 17-year-olds to a dozen...

The Expansionist Aspirations of the UK Online Gambling Industry

25 Jun 2012

I recently attended a half day seminar on The UK Online Gambling Industry. The seminar was organised by the Westminster eForum which 'aims to provide [an]...

Quaker Action on Alcohol and Drugs Welcomes Gambling Watch UK

31 May 2012

Gambling Watch is a welcome addition to the gambling landscape. The last few years have seen many changes as regards gambling: it is now widely advertised on...

Launch of the Responsible Gambling Trust

25 May 2012

April 2012 saw the launch of the new body – the Responsible Gambling Trust (RGT), which replaces the old Responsible Gambling Fund (RGF).  The RGT takes over...

The Saturday Guardian Money Section talks to leading experts

02 May 2012

Two-thirds of patients treated at the UK's first specialist problem gambling clinic have indicated that controversial fixed odds betting terminals encouraged...

High Streets First - putting the high street before betting shops

12 Apr 2012

High Streets First is campaigning for a change in the law to give local communities a say over the number of betting shops in their area. At the moment...

Support Gambling Watch UK

Together we can make a difference

We believe there is overwhelming support for the view that there are already too many opportunities for gambling and that this is bad for individual, family and community health, but our voices need to be heard if we are to influence public policy..

Click here to register your support