Whilst the fate of the money raised by the UK’s new Statutory Gambling Levy is being rubber-stamped, disputes about the new funding framework and its outcomes will inevitably escalate.
Charities are now expected to make formal applications for funding generated by the Levy, but many have been less than impressed by how the government’s Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID) has handled its crucial part of the process and its apparent attitude towards gambling operators.
“Treatment providers need to be able to work with the industry, without fear or favour,” emphasised Jordan Lea, the founder of DealMeOut, during the recent Illegal Gambling Prevention Summit in Manchester. He further warned that the race for funding risks losing sight of the true cause of helping the users who need access to gambling prevention, education and treatment services.
A potential lack of collaboration with the industry is causing significant concern as the surging threat of the black market in the UK intensifies the need for heightened player protection and support.
But questions remain as to whether it is possible to have an effective harm reduction strategy without significant input from the industry, given there are some quarters that are essentially trying to shift the safeguards in this direction.
Independence or ideological purity?
Duncan Garvie, the Founder of BetBlocker, recently took to LinkedIn to reveal that he has faced scrutiny from The Guardian over the decision of OHID to grant BetBlocker funding. Whilst scrutiny is something that should be welcomed, the line of questioning appeared to condemn any engagement with the industry over the most effective player protection methods.
Garvie revealed that Rob Davies of The Guardian asked whether the conflict of interest policy of OHID was at risk of being breached, as two of BetBlocker’s trustees, Garvie and John Wright, come from the gambling industry.
He responded by stating: “Independence from industry influence was a core requirement of the OHID process and was fully addressed within our application.”
Garvie went on to praise the fundamental role that Wright played in the development of the BetBlocker project, as an experienced web/app developer providing “crucial insight to meeting many of the technical challenges that were involved in creating the vital service that BetBlocker delivers”.
He also revealed: “As part of the OHID application process, John agreed to step down from the Board of Trustees of the charity, to help evidence our impartiality to OHID. This is a loss of a valuable asset to the organisation, but a necessary step to ensure public confidence in the service.
“In relation to my own role with Blexr, I have served as an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Official. This is a role that requires formal approval from the UK Gambling Commission and Malta Competition and Consumer Affairs Authority, a process that included demonstrable independence and impartiality requirements. My role has an inbuilt regulatory evaluation of industry influence that extends back, long before the UK harm prevention funding system had this requirement.”
Winners, perhaps. Losers, definitely
At the Illegal Gambling Prevention Summit, there were widespread pleas for OHID to increase its collaboration, warning that there is no reality in which a coherent harm reduction education programme can exist in the absence of industry support and knowledge.
Garvie expressed his deep trepidation that there are currently no signs that OHID will engage with the industry in any effective way. A fear that, it has to be said, was reverberating around the room at the conference in Manchester on Tuesday.
He was, however, one of the few voices at the event who provided a more optimistic outlook on the future for funding of the safer gambling sector.
Underpinning the need for caution and patience, Garvie emphasised that the next two years are something of a transitional period, with a big disruption inevitable as the system goes through such a wholesale change. He praised OHID for the softening of its position, which has taken place over the last 18 months, and underlined his optimism that this easing can continue from both sides.
Eventually, there is hope that a place can be reached where all stakeholders are involved in the discussion, working towards the cause of improved player protection.
Also speaking at the Illegal Gambling Prevention Summit, Graham England, CEO at Ara Recovery For All, stated the urgent need for the further softening of OHID’s stance on the industry, which he believed hasn’t happened enough thus far in the process and will cause some that have been around for a long time, doing a lot of good work to cease existing in the coming weeks.
Garvie highlighted his belief that as the process transitioned into a new era, “there were always going to be winners and losers”.
Amid widespread warnings over the shortfall during the transitional period, the government has since implemented a Gambling Levy Transition Fund (GLTF) in a bid to support charities that missed out on funding under the Statutory Levy.
However, many have already stepped away from the process. Lea went as far as to state that he had been “a huge opponent of the levy” from the outset.
Revealing that Deal Me Out made the decision not to apply in the OHID process for the new levy funding, Lea was scathing in his condemnation of the new process as he stated his concerns around the accelerated shift from a powerful few towards a much more aggressive and militant public health message.
He lamented that his early fears around the new process were coming to fruition, resulting in significant job losses and the closure of many key charities. This included the departure of GambleAware, which Lea felt was an initial priority for many campaigners as the process commenced, and an urgency to remove those with any history of industry funding.
Despite the best efforts of many, the dispute around OHID funding is only likely to intensify in the coming weeks and whilst solidarity is a pipe dream for now, eradicating some of the silos and ensuring a level of collaboration is found is essential for effective player safety at a time when threats are starker than ever.
