Lord Foster of Bath, a vocal proponent of gambling law reform in the UK, has called for legislative change to address gambling marketing in sports and unlicensed sports data collection.
The Liberal Democrat peer is a long-time critic of gambling advertising, while other members of his party have also attempted to amend legislation to introduce gambling-related provisions.
Unfortunately for Lord Foster, his attempt to amend the Sporting Events Bill to address advertising, marketing, sponsorship and sports data collection has also fallen flat.
However, his focus on unlicensed operations and illegal gambling may be indicative of the licensed industry and gambling reform advocates increasingly finding common ground – common ground against the black market.
During the bill’s report stage in the House of Lords on 15 July, Lord Foster called for two amendments:
- To ensure that all sporting venues where the activities covered the Sports Events Bill take place are “clear of gambling advertising, marketing and sponsorship”.
- To make it illegal for any organisation, like an international betting company unlicensed in the UK, to use data collected by companies which are also not licensed to do so.
Bath and Twycross find common ground … almost
The Sports Events Bill was proposed to the House of Lords by Baroness Twycross of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS).
The bill aims to create a common set of legislative provisions for major UK sports events, and to give financial assistance to sporting events held throughout the country.
Baroness Twycross is a familiar name to UK gambling stakeholders as the DCMS’ Gambling Minister, and Chair of the department’s Illegal Gambling Taskforce – a newly created body which is moving to ban unlicensed gambling sponsorship in sports.
This was referenced by Foster in the Lords this week, with the peer saying: “The Minister is rightly desperately keen to do something about illegal gambling. I want to do so too, but I also want to do something about the harm that gambling in this country causes.
“The solution is very simple, and that is what my amendment effectively provides.
“It says that we should make it illegal for anybody to use the data from companies if they do not have a licence; it is a very simple solution that would make it much easier to bring prosecutions against people who do not have one.”
Baroness Twycross ultimately asked Lord Foster to withdraw his amendment, which he did.
While the duo expressed agreement on the importance of battling illegal gambling, there are still clear differences of opinion.
Twycross remarked that the government does not see the sharing of sports data with unlicensed operators as a “significant issue” – at least not for now.
“However, if needed, we will not hesitate to consider this further through our task force. I would be happy to continue discussing this with the noble Lord, Lord Foster, including on the additional information he gave today,” she said.
Lord Foster goes for sponsorship again
Aside from unlicensed data, as mentioned above, Foster also had gambling advertising in his sights. Advertising, marketing and sponsorship are long-running targets for the veteran politician, and his fellow Liberal Democrat members.
Last year, Lib Dem MP Max Wilkinson attempted to amend the Football Governance Bill – the main purpose of which was to create the now established Independent Football Regulator (IFR) – to create a requirement for clubs to distance themselves from gambling companies.
This was rejected by DCMS Secretary Lisa Nandy, with the government keen to keep gambling firmly under the remit of the 2005 Gambling Act. This has not stopped Foster from shooting his shot again.
“I genuinely believe this is something we should be adopting for all sporting activities in this country, and certainly for international sporting events, on which a lot of gambling ends up taking place,” he said.
“Even though FIFA does not have advertising in the various venues, worldwide, gambling on the games currently taking place is believed to total half a trillion dollars—and that is just the World Cup.
“Gambling is very big business and it causes a great deal of harm to children and many other people.”
Twycross’ response to Foster was very similar to Nandy’s response to Wilkinson last year, with the Baroness stating that it is “not appreciated for the government to intervene in commercial sponsorship and advertising arrangements”.
However, she added that the government “will not hesitate to take steps where necessary to ensure that these arrangements are a social response” – something mandated by the 2023 Gambling Act review White Paper’s Code of Conduct on sports sponsorship.
Twycross’ responses show that the government is sticking to its guns:
- Ensuring the Gambling Act review remains the main piece of legislation governing the UK gambling sector.
- Seeing out the recommendations of the 2023 Gambling Act review White Paper, despite controversy around measures like Financial Risk Assessments.
- Continuing to work against the illegal industry via the Illegal Gambling Taskforce, headed up by the Baroness.
Nonetheless, the exchange in the Lords this week shows that pro-gambling reform politicians like Lord Foster are keen to see gambling advertising rolled back, and are not content with existing UK gambling regulations.
There is a chance they could find a more sympathetic ear in Andy Burnham, the soon-to-be-new-Prime Minister of the UK, who has shown himself to be a supporter of some gambling reform arguments.
Also, while the government remains focused on keeping the Gambling Act the main piece of legislation for UK gambling, there is still the possibility of other bills being used to re-regulate the industry as Foster attempted to do with the Sports Events Bill this week.
Earlier this year, the English Devolution and Local Powers Bill passed the House of Lords with an amendment to reverse the Aim to Permit rule on retail gambling licensing – though this is a notion that had gained the support of PM Keir Starmer, while for now the government seems reluctant to impose more restrictions on betting marketing.