Handing over the baton: Sarah Harrison gives her last interview as UKGC CEO

“I will miss this industry as I have absolutely loved what I’ve done here,” Sarah Harrison tells EGR Intel in her final interview as CEO of Great Britain’s gambling regulator. “I’ve really liked the people I’ve worked with, especially my colleagues at the Gambling Commission, but also the people in the industry more broadly because they are very capable, passionate and creative.”

Since her appointment back in 2015, Harrison’s main concern has been to channel some of that creativity into the interests of protecting consumers. And with her tenure as CEO about to come to an end, few could argue with her steadfast determination and tenacity in this respect having overseen a period of momentous regulatory change in the UK online gambling sector.

Harrison’s reign as head of the Gambling Commission clearly heralded a new level of concern for social responsibility and the interests of customers, particularly when it came to the dilemma of problem gambling. This included handing a plethora of multi-million pound fines to operators which the Gambling Commission perceived to have failed in their responsibilities to their customers and breached their licensing requirements.

But despite leaving for new pastures with a new governmental role, Harrison insists what we have seen in the UK market is just the beginning, warning that far more action is still needed. And she is adamant her legacy of “ruffling feathers” will live on as the Gambling Commission pledges to continue its relentless pursuit of preventing harm and protecting the interests of consumers.

EGR Intel: As you reflect on your tenure at the Gambling Commission, what would you like your legacy to be?

Sarah Harrison (SH): What I think is important is a very strong consumer focus, including those who enjoy their gambling but have a right to be treated fairly and those for whom it has become a real problem. If I’ve ruffled feathers in the pursuit of putting the consumer first, then I make no apology for that. However, my sense is there are many leaders in this industry who are incredibly capable and successful and who themselves are driving change. That is just what I wanted to see, so I don’t think what I’ve been saying has fallen on deaf ears.

EGR Intel: What was the driving factor for you taking on the role as CEO of the Gambling Commission initially?

SH: I think it’s fair to say I hadn’t set out to join the gambling industry. But the thing that really interested me about it was that as a sector, it is rich in data and technology, highly competitive and fast-moving, and I felt it was a great opportunity as a regulator because my interest was how you get that data and technology working to fulfil the licence objectives. This could mean keeping crime out of the industry, making play safe and treating customers fairly.

That’s why one of the things we will continue to be very focused on is the work going on across the industry with the use of algorithms and data analytics to help understand the patterns of play, which may be indicative of problem play, and then thinking about the interventions that are right for the customer. I think there is massive power in that.

EGR Intel: Is this change coming at a level you would ideally like to see?

SH: We would always want these things to be done at a much faster pace; there’s no great surprise about that. I think a lot of the challenges operators have is not just in whether they have the right systems and skills, but whether they have the right culture and governance framework in place because the tone comes from the top and from the board. I’ve spoken to boards at a number of companies about how they see things and I really think that’s where the leadership needs to come from.

EGR Intel: Is there a natural adversarial relationship between the operator and customer which makes this industry particularly unique?

SH: I have observed this, but I don’t personally understand it. Customers are the best place for operators to get free and good quality feedback, let alone sustain their business over the long term. I think a mature business is one that talks to their customers, listens to what they’ve got to say and responds.

There are some bodies representing customer interests, some of which I’ve met, and I think they’ve got a lot of interesting things to say about the industry. At the end of the day, they care about the industry because they are gamblers themselves, and I think businesses could do well to listen to what they’ve got to say.

EGR Intel: How close is your relationship with these punter advocacy groups?

SH: It’s as close to the relationship I have with gambling operators. The business of being a gambling regulator is you need to listen to a whole group of voices and then make your own judgement based on the evidence and what you think are the right set of standards and consistent with our statutory duties. Our accountability as the regulator is still ultimately to parliament and the government.

EGR Intel: Do you think the consumer’s voice had previously been missing from the debate?

SH: I’m not interested in looking back too much. From the Commission’s perspective, coming into the job and working with my colleagues, we do annual staff surveys at the Gambling Commission and our engagement scores have been progressively increasing, which I believe is testament to the fact that colleagues are very positive about our agenda. But the one thing that has always been consistent throughout though is the very high score staff give to their role for protecting customers. These are colleagues who have been at the Commission before I arrived, as well as recent joiners.

Sarah Harrison will leave the UK Gambling Commission this week

EGR Intel: What has been the overall reaction from operators and have many said they believe you are clamping down too much?

SH: I hope not, but I think it’s been very important for us to clamp down in some areas. I’ve been very clear that we have a broad range of powers and we must use them. Businesses which don’t pay regards to their customers’ needs or their licence obligations need to know there is a stick and we will use it. I think that’s a very important message to get across but it’s not the only thing we need to do.

One aspect of our current strategy is not only a commitment to using the stick, but wanting to work with the industry to help oprators understand what is required and, more importantly, to help operators share best practice across their businesses. I think operators are all investing in the same things by looking at algorithms, data and technology for safer gambling, and while there is power in that, they need to come together and not look at this as a matter of intellectual property and something they should compete over, but it should be more something they share and collaborate on because that would put them in a better place to move further and faster, which is what we want.

EGR Intel: During your speech at ICE, you spoke about the industry “ripping chunks” out of each other. What did you mean by that?

SH: I spoke about the good, the bad and the ugly of the industry, and in the ugly the example was that the different sectors of this industry, particularly around the issue of FOBTs have, spend too much time arguing with each other. I believe that has been a massive missed opportunity. It was when the industry should have come together and offered leadership on the issues we are focused on, in particular around safer gambling.

EGR Intel: Does the land-based and online split play a role here?

SH: The growth of the market is nearly all online, some from integrated businesses and some online-only. My points about fairer and fairer gambling applied right across the board. One of the first things we will focus on under our new strategy is the online market and we will set out very soon the product of some of the work we’ve done on the remote sector. We’ve gone back to look at what’s happened since PoC, how the market has evolved, and how some of our rules have stood the test of time. Our conclusion is that more action is needed there.

EGR Intel: Does the Gambling Commission have enough muscle for it to fulfil its objectives?

SH: The Gambling Commission has a lot of powers and the point is we will use all of them, including imposing greater financial penalties and our important power in relation to licence reviews. I think this kind of action is what the industry wants. One of the points operators have unsurprisingly made is that they want a level playing field. It is a fiercely competitive market and we’re very explicit in our strategy that we need to intervene is principally for the customers, but also to help create a level playing field so there is no value in not complying.

EGR Intel: The Gambling Commission recently backed the findings of the CMA’s investigation into online casinos. What would you most like to see change from this perspective?

SH: Ts&Cs was one of the first things I spoke about at my first ICE speech a couple of years ago, so no operator should be in any doubt about the Commission’s commitment to tackling these issues. My only observation is that it’s disappointing it has taken regulators collectively to take the action to get the industry to recognise it needs to change.

EGR Intel: Why is that? Is there no industry body prepared to help do this?

SH: The answer would be no in my experience. I think operators have a simple choice because we will take action, but it would be better if it were not exclusively action by regulators that is the driving force behind this change. The industry often knows what the issues are and could contribute to the solution, but until we see more progress in that respect it’s definitely for the regulator to act and we will certainly do so.

EGR Intel: Are you keeping a watchful eye on what is happening on the B2B side of the industry in this respect?

SH: There is a very important point here because the Gambling Commission licenses and regulates B2C and B2B companies for a very important reason, which is to have the powers to set standards through the supply chain. We will continue to do that. The important message for B2B companies is that they, more than anybody, have the power to look at the nature of the product offered and how it could be made safer. They have a big responsibility in this market and we will hold them to account and if we are concerned at all, we have the powers to do something about it.