A safer bet: Gambling and the risks of over-regulation

Institute of Economic Affairs Submitter

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3850612

2021-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:The government has launched a review into British gambling law "to make sure it is fit for the digital age". A coalition of activists has proposed a range of anti-gambling measures, including an advertising ban, low stake limits, a monthly spending cap, slower gameplay, and a ban on VIP schemes, bonuses and inducements. Despite the perception of a gambling "epidemic" in Britain, the number of people who gamble has not risen in the last decade, and there has been no rise in the rate of problem gambling since 1999. The number of children who gamble has halved since 2011. In real terms, the amount spent on gambling has declined since 2015. Many of the policies proposed by the anti-gambling coalition would be incompatible with the government’s stated aim of respecting "the enjoyment people get from gambling" and "the freedom of adults to choose how they spend their money". There is little evidence that an advertising ban would have any impact on problem gambling. A ban on sponsorship would similarly hinder licensed operators from establishing their brands and compromise many sports without yielding any benefits. Stake limits for online games would make them unplayable for many gamblers. This is not regulation in the normal sense, but a form of neo-prohibition that would drive players to unlicensed, unregulated, and untaxed websites and undermine the key objectives of British gambling law. However, the technology exists to track harmful patterns of play and intervene. Sophisticated algorithms and timely interventions for the minority of high-risk gamblers are more effective than simplistic, blunt tools. The ability of "Big Data" to identify problem gamblers and prevent harm is unlike anything we have seen before. Regulated online operators use a range of practical harm reduction measures, which advance the government’s objectives without infringing on the rights of the average punter or handing a competitive advantage to the unregulated sector. Not every company uses their technology to prevent harm in the same way, but best practice could be made standard through regulation. It is these practical solutions that could be the focus of the government’s review.