DCMS chair calls UKGC effectiveness into question
Julian Knight slams regulator on affordability and gambling-related harm funding in tense parliamentary committee meeting
The chair of the DCMS Select Committee has called into question the role of the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) in a scathing takedown of the regulator, arguing it lacked transparency and sufficient oversight.
Speaking during a committee meeting regarding the future of the National Lottery, chair Julian Knight was grilling UKGC CEO Andrew Rhodes and UKGC executive director John Tanner over the ongoing legal challenges arising from the awarding of the fourth lottery licence to Allwyn.
However, the debate took a sudden turn when Knight switched to quiz the pair regarding the UKGC’s research into affordability, along with its work to combat gambling-related harm.
On the UKGC’s role in this area, Knight queried what metrics are used to determine the success of the National Strategy to Reduce Gambling Harms.
Knight argued that a lack of evaluation of various schemes’ successes was “slipshod” and that the regulator did not possess any data to understand the full effect of the schemes’ impact on reducing gambling-related harm.
Knight went on to claim that the £40m, garnered from voluntary settlements from operators and used to fund schemes, “just goes out the door”.
Rhodes disputed that the UKGC used “headline rates” of gambling-related harm to understand the impact of the schemes, a retort Knight rejected, questioning again what metrics were in place for evaluation.
Rhodes said he would write to Knight on the matter.
Knight said: “What do you do? There seems to be money going out the door and no accountability for that money, apart from when you make the award. This money just splashes out there and you have no idea in terms of what this impacts with the licensees.
“I am struggling to think precisely as an organisation how you are doing your job because these seem to be key measures and indicators of whether you are successful,” he added.
Touching on affordability, Knight probed into why the UKGC’s own evidence into affordability limits were not made public following the consultation undertaken in November 2020.
“It does seem to be very strange that you should announce a consultation in November 2020 on such an important area, which frankly does need scrutiny more widely than just DCMS and that was not released publicly,” Knight reprehended.
“I thought that would be of interest to parliamentarians, rather than for it just to be handed covertly to officials at DCMS. That seems a very strange approach and lacking in transparency, frankly.”