After the publication of the Gambling Act Review White Paper last week, House of Lords members criticised the amount of measures that were put out for consultation.
Lord Parkinson, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Culture Media and Sport Department, answered questions in the chamber from members regarding the document.
The Lords generally welcomed the provisions in the white paper. However, they felt the document was not sufficiently comprehensive in certain areas. The Lords were divided on the document’s content, including the number of consultations and the decision not to further restrict advertising.
“Hurry Up and Wait”
Former chairman of the Select Committee for Gambling Harms, Lord Grade of Yarmouth, a Conservative peer from Yarmouth, welcomed the direction in the whitepaper “unambiguously”.
He criticised, however, the dozen measures the government will put forward for consultation. He argued that primary legislation wouldn’t be needed for most of the recommendations in the white paper. Grade also highlighted the 60 000 responses to the consultation which preceded the white paper.
Grade asked, “How long before we have further consultations?” “That’s a problem.”
“This reminds of the saying in the movie industry: ‘hurry up, and wait’. When you arrive at the location, everyone is ready and standing around but nothing happens. “We are ready to move forward with this,” he said.
Parkinson defended his document against these criticisms. Parkinson defended the document from these criticisms.
Parkinson said that there is a big difference between the consultations which led to the publication of the whitepaper, in terms of what to do, whether to do something, and now the consultations on how to go about it.
The Lord stated that the purpose of this process was not only procedural. It would enable the government to make the right decisions in some areas where they haven’t yet decided. This includes the exact level and structure of statutory levies.
Parkinson stated that this approach would minimize the risk of a legal challenge which would cause “further delays and frustration” for advocates of reform.
Failing to further advertise
The Liberal Democrat Chair of the Peers For Gambling Reform group echoed the sentiments expressed in the chamber and called the proposals outlined within the document, “important and welcomed steps in the right directions.”
Foster criticised the decision of the government to increase advertising.
Foster said that there is clear evidence to show that advertising encourages people to start gambling, to increase their gambling and to restart gambling after they have stopped.
Why would the industry spend PS1.5bn on marketing each year if not to increase its profits? Other countries have taken action to restrict or ban gambling advertising. The British public wants us to ban or restrict gambling advertising. “Why is there not more being proposed in the UK?”
Parkinson, in a response to the voluntary Premier League shirt advertising ban, said he was pleased with the actions taken by the white paper.
The Lord said that the white paper provides more detail. Sports bodies are working together on a code of conduct for the gambling sector. The white paper is full of detail, but there’s still more to do.
