UK

Online slots limits implemented in the UK iGaming market earlier this year are having minimal impact on underlying financial figures and engagement for the vertical.

Data released by the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) has shown online slots gross gambling yield for the market’s second quarter of 2025 (July to September) to be £746.5m, up 9% year-over-year (Q2 2024: £686.1m).

The number of spins also rose by 4% YoY to 24.4 billion (Q2 2024: 23.5 billion), while the average monthly active accounts fell by 0.4% to 4.4 million per month (Q2 2024: 4.4 million).

Despite it being the second quarter in which the maximum stake limit for online slots had been implemented – £5 limit for adults from 9 April, £2 limit for 18 to 24 year olds from 21 May – GGY and the number of spins figures continued on an upward trajectory, recording new highs.

The number of spins per session has fallen to 130 (Q2 2024: 141), while GGY per session has declined to £3.96 (Q2 2024: £4.11), but the total number of sessions has increased by 13% to 188 million (166 million).

Online slots sessions lasting over an hour have dropped by 15% YoY as well to 8.6 million (Q2 2024: 10.1 million), with the average session lasting 16 minutes (Q2 2024: 17 minutes) and approximately 5% of all sessions exceeding one hour (Q2 2024: 6%).

Overall, this data could be interpreted to say that online slots limits have little to no impact on GGY and the number of spins for operators as more people are playing, but ultimately, players are spending less time and money playing online slots.

However, the UKGC did note that several operators “refined their session length methodology during the previous year, which will impact year-on-year comparisons on the number of sessions, sessions over one hour and average session length metrics”.

Across other verticals in Q2, the commission stated that:

Online total GGY was £1.42bn, up 8% YoY. The overall number of total bets and spins increased 3% YoY, to 26.1 billion. The average monthly active accounts decreased 7% to 12 million.

Real event betting GGY increased by 12% YoY to £508m. The number of bets decreased 3%. The average monthly active accounts decreased by 14%.

Betting premises GGY decreased by 5% to £508m. The number of total bets and spins decreased by 2% to 3.1 billion.

The government’s newly published “Men’s Health Strategy” calls for a deeper focus on how problem gambling impacts the male population of the UK, with an ongoing understanding towards policy treating gambling harms and consequences as a public health issue.

Announced by the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), led by Secretary Wes Streeting, the strategy recognises that gambling-related harms are ‘disproportionately experienced by men’ and that young men in particular are more likely to gamble online, particularly with casinos.

Its publication comes seven months after the Select Committee on Health and Social Care, tasked with scrutinising departmental policy in this area, called for an urgent review of the 2005 Gambling Act to ensure that public health is factored into legislation.

National approach to gambling harm
Though the government has heeded the Select Committee’s calls to some extent – there is no commitment to yet another review of the Gambling Act, as White Paper recommendations were published in April 2023, and are yet to be fully implemented.

Responding to the strategy, Greg Fell, President of the Association of Directors of Public Health, said: “We are pleased to see this new strategy emphasises preventing the many avoidable illnesses and diseases – including a number of cancers and respiratory and mental health conditions – that are driven by smoking, drinking and gambling.”

A key pledge is the development of a ‘coordinated approach’ on gambling harm prevention, set at the national, regional and local level. Campaign groups and gambling treatment organisations, like GambleAware, had previously highlighted the need to gambling treatment policy to be tailored for different local considerations.

The government envisions a national-regional strategy including support for local authorities and the voluntary sector, development of digital tools, and building of evidence of best policy and practice.

The voluntary sector can expect to receive a grant from April 2026 to fund prevention programmes with a focus on young men aged 25 to 34, and both white British men and those from ethnic minority backgrounds.

This grant is going to be separate to the statutory levy on research, education and treatment – the RET levy – which came into effect in April this year as a key recommendation of the 2020-2023 review of the 2005 Gambling Act. Levy payment collections began on 1 September, at a rate of 0.1% and 1% depending on gambling activity type.

The strategy has praised the levy as being independent from the sector, a reference to the often repeated criticisms of GambleAware, the chief commissioning body for gambling harm prevention and treatment programmes, that the organisation was too dependent on industry funds.

Other pledges include greater data collection and evaluation, and delivering the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) research programme to address gaps in evidence and research into gambling harm.

James Grimes, Director of Chapter One, a prevention programme run by the gambling reform advocacy group Gambling with Lives, said: “The release of this strategy is very welcome, especially in its recognition of the health harms caused by gambling – harms felt by countless men across the country.”

Another score for gambling law reform
The government’s new strategy has seen gambling written into the NHS’ 10 Year Health Plan, alongside alcohol, drugs, tobacco and vaping – a clear endorsement that the government is increasingly viewing gambling as a public health issue as possible.

Outcomes will be indicative of the NHS taking a prominent role in gambling harm prevention and treatment, previously dominated by the charity sector. The NHS’ role had already been considerably expanded when NHS England was given the job of commissioning projects via RET levy funds.

The health body takes over this task from GambleAware, which is subsequently going to shut down in March – although the government is also in the process of scrapping NHS England itself as a part of a wider cost cutting and efficiency push.

As mentioned above, various stakeholders have been calling for such an approach over the past few years, including GambleAware, the Social Market Foundation (SMF), NHS professionals and other treatment specialists, and politicians.

Throughout 2025, various politicians have been calling for the government to take another look at gambling regulation. Layla Moran, Chair of the aforementioned health and social care Select Committee, is one such voice.

“The Men’s Health Strategy should be a golden opportunity for the government to get serious about reducing harms caused by gambling addiction,” Moran told PoliticsHome yesterday.

“The committee has already called on ministers to consider regulations on gambling ads, particularly to limit the frequency and kinds of promotions and incentives that can be sent to encourage individuals to gamble.

“And as many local authorities often struggle to prevent gambling venues from clustering on high streets in deprived areas, due to a lack of resources in the face of legal challenges, we say that public health officials should be given a greater say in the planning system.”

The strategy suggests that Moran and others have achieved at least some of their goals. In its assessment of local approaches to preventing gambling harm, the strategy notes that ‘several local authorities are introducing advertising and sponsorship policies that restrict exposure to gambling marketing’.

Today’s Men’s Health Strategy, coupled with the debate around taxation which has seen over 100 Labour MPs voice support for higher gambling tax rates, all seems to indicate a government policy in favour of tighter regulation and monitoring of this industry. This could perhaps see a two pronged political approach to gambling, treating it as both a business issue and a health issue, depending on the topic.

“The first ever Men’s Health strategy is an important milestone, and the fact that it correctly identifies gambling as a significant risk is particularly welcome,” said Lord Foster of Bath, Chair of Action on Gambling, summarising an opinion likely held by many other British politicians right now.

“Under the leadership of the Department of Health, progress in tackling preventable health issues that disproportionately impact men, such as problem gambling, will at last be possible.”

Significant risks associated with the use of pre-paid digital vouchers have been laid bare in the UK Gambling Commission’s latest action.

The UK regulator has ordered Videoslots Limited, the operator of videoslots.co.uk, mrvegas.com and megariches.com, to pay £650,000 after an investigation revealed anti-money laundering and social responsibility failures.

The case cited a customer who was able to fund their account in excess of £75,000 using digital pre-payment vouchers, before transferring the proceeds of their gambling activity to four different bank accounts.

Despite the presence of these high-risk factors, the customer’s automated AML risk score did not trigger the threshold for the operator to request source of funds information promptly, ‘leading to unacceptable delays in an account review taking place’.

John Pierce, Commission Director of Enforcement, explained: “Open-loop payment systems are high risk in nature because they could enable anonymous deposits and make it harder to trace funds.

“In this case, the licensee failed to implement timely customer interactions and did not conduct enhanced customer due diligence until the customer had reached significant spend thresholds – such failings are unacceptable.”

UKGC guidance classifies all pre-paid payment methods as high-risk due to the ability for these methods to be pre-loaded using cash or, in some cases, cryptoassets.

The commission requires such payment methods to be factored into a customer’s risk profile and appropriate risk-based due diligence to be undertaken.

“Operators must review how open-loop payment systems such as prepaid digital vouchers are managed in a gambling environment because they are high risk and present operational challenges in terms of effective monitoring,” added Pierce.

Commission calls for crypto review

The need to address the rising popularity of crypto payments has been a particular focus for the UKGC’s CEO, Andrew Rhodes, who earlier this month emphasised the “pressure building within the system”.

“The reality is, in some years to come, there will probably be a significant cohort of consumers who use cryptocurrencies because that is what they’re accustomed to. It is a demographic shift that will find they have no place in the legitimate industry because of the currency they use,” stated Rhodes during his CEO briefing.

He added that any changes must be led by government-level discussions, as ‘once you open that door, you cannot close it’.

“The reality is, and this growth in those demographics means, I don’t think governments can ignore that pattern,” said Rhodes.

Not the first infraction

Other failures highlighted by the UKGC investigation included Videoslots’ deposit limit mechanism. Although the operator’s monitoring systems automatically set a monthly deposit, that limit ran across a calendar month and did not include the customer’s initial deposit.

As a result, a customer was able to lose £5,000 in a month despite having a £3,000 monthly deposit limit. Another also lost £7,500 over 18 days despite having a £2,000 monthly deposit limit.

The UKGC also noted that the monitoring systems deployed by Videoslots also did not effectively identify customers who were potentially at risk of gambling harm, citing one customer who did not receive any interaction from the operator despite losing £6,550 over the course of three active days of gambling across a two-month period.

Alongside the financial penalty, Videoslots has received a warning and is also required to undergo a third-party audit to ensure it is implementing its AML and safer gambling policies and procedures.

This is not the first time that Videoslots has been in hot water with the UKGC. In June 2023, the company paid £2m as part of a settlement with the regulator due to similar AML and social responsibility failures.

iGaming Expert has reached out to Videoslots Limited for comment.

Gaming Compliance International has moved to significantly elevate the war against the black market through the acquisition of Yield Sec for an undisclosed sum.

As a result of the deal, Yield Sec’s platform, processes and team will be integrated into GCI’s operations. Ismail Vali, Founder and CEO of the black market monitoring platform, will also assume the role of President of GCI.

Matt Holt, CEO of GCI, commented: “We are proud to welcome Ismail Vali and the entire Yield Sec team to GCI. This acquisition accelerates our mission to deliver transparency, integrity, player protection and certainty for regulated jurisdictions worldwide.

“Yield Sec’s innovative platform for effective and efficient disruption will become a cornerstone of our offering, enabling regulators and operators to gain unprecedented awareness and actionable awareness across the total online gaming marketplace.”

According to GCI, Yield Sec’s machine-led monitoring technology, which it says was adapted from military anti-terrorism and counterinsurgency, will become a core pillar of the company’s offering as it seeks to deliver advanced regulatory technology and marketplace transparency to the global gaming industry.

Vali described joining forces with GCI as the “next stage in our mission to defeat black market crime and protect the integrity of regulated gaming”.

“Yield Sec was founded to help regulators and operators see the entire online marketplace – legal and illegal – and act with certainty,” he added.

“GCI strengthens that foundation, expanding our ability to serve clients across commerce, community, and consumers. The purpose remains the same: to secure a sustainable, compliant, and fair marketplace that benefits everyone.”

Yield Sec was founded in 2020 through a collaboration between the marketing agency A Game Above and the player protection company Beanstalk to provide a tool for the industry to monitor and counter black market gambling activity.

Black market trepidation

The deal comes at a time when the global black market is becoming an increasingly prevalent and distressing issue for the regulated iGaming sector.

The Betting and Gaming Council recently estimated that £2.7bn is staked annually on the online black market in the UK, equivalent to 2.1% of the amount staked with regulated operators.

Meanwhile, Andrew Rhodes, the UK Gambling Commission CEO, stated: “We are determined to protect consumers and maintain confidence in the regulated sector by taking robust, evidence-led action.

“Since April 2024, we’ve seen a tenfold increase in our disruption activity, and we intend to continue to work with a wide range of partners to build on this success.”

He added: “The illegal online market is unsafe, unfair and criminal – that is why the Commission has invested heavily in this area in recent years.

“To be even more effective in combating the illegal market,it’s vital that we have both a deep and broad understanding of how it operates, and this insight is a crucial step in building that understanding in a very complex area to research.”

The UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) has published the datasets of its Young People and Gambling Survey 2025 facing its now customary questioning.

The protection of adolescents from gambling remains one of the most emotive in UK gambling, particularly amid a backdrop of political concerns of digital harms and dysfunctional behaviours. Yet beyond the headlines lies a picture that is hard to frame by numbers and stats alone.

Participation rises but context matters

The Commission reports that 49% of young people aged 11–17 participated in some form of gambling in the past year. But this topline figure is under the context that the majority of activities are “legal, non-commercial, or informal,” ranging from arcade machines to private bets between friends.

Of significance, 30% of young people reported spending their own money on gambling — a modest rise from 27% in 2024.

The Commission attributes this increase primarily to a rise in unregulated, informal gambling, not underage access to licensed products. In fact:

21% spent money on arcade machines
14% bet with friends or family
5% played cards for money
Just 6% spent money on age‑restricted, regulated forms of gambling — exactly the same level as last year

Youth problem gambling “statistically stable”
The most politically sensitive figure — the youth problem gambling rate — is reported at 1.2%, down from 1.5% in 2024. The Gambling Commission is clear: this shift is “statistically stable,” meaning the change is not significant given sample size and margins of error.

But here is where industry analysts such as Dan Waugh of Regulus Partners who raise important questions.

The DSM‑IV‑MR‑J, used to classify “problem gambling”, is not a diagnostic tool. Its thresholds are broad: behaviours such as using lunch money to gamble or arguing with parents can count toward a score of “four or more” — the bar for an “adult problem gambler.”

By comparison, NHS Health Surveys, using adult screening tools (PGSI, DSM‑IV), consistently find near-zero problem gambling in 16–19‑year‑olds. If the “crisis” identified by DSM‑IV‑MR‑J disappears as soon as participants turn 16 or 18, something is off.

This leads Waugh and others to argue that the tool inflates prevalence and can create the appearance of a “youth gambling problem” that the harder data simply does not support.

Advertising high exposure but no causation
Advertising remains the political lightning rod. The survey shows:

49% of young people see gambling ads weekly on social media
47% see them in apps
Boys are particularly exposed (53% on YouTube vs 31% of girls)

But again, exposure does not mean influence. The Commission’s own data shows most young people do not act on these ads, and many of the ads they see are for lotteries, not high-risk gambling products.

Waugh also notes that some studies cited to support advertising restrictions use “extraordinarily wide definitions of children” — including people up to age 25 — or classify someone as “susceptible” if they refuse to say they will never gamble in the future. The framework is hardly rigorous.

Check the regulatory temperature

Operators recognise their responsibility to protect young people, and most already back: stricter ID checks, dedicated youth education programmes and heavily restricted marketing pathways.

But there is growing concern that selective readings of the YPGS are being used as a blunt tool to justify sweeping restrictions. Yes — policy should evolve and safeguarding matters. But policy built on misinterpreted or overly broad data will rarely deliver the intended outcomes.

A useful tool… but poorly used
The YPGS has been shown to have been one of the best resources that have helped to inform on youth behaviour, in particular with regards to first adolescent engagements with gambling..

However, when its findings are stripped of nuance or weaponised, it is little a guide to constructive policy and great simply for serving as a political sledgehammer.

If it means to actually improve protections for young people, then we need more accurate measures to determine youth/teen harms. Policy interventions need to be based on measured analysis, not alarmism as the data is useful. but the real concern lies in how it’s used.

UK licence holder NetBet Enterprises Ltd has paid £650,000 to the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) after an investigation into anti-money laundering (AML) failures.

A statement from the regulator stated that the company, operator of online gambling provider NetBet UK, agreed to a settlement with the Commission after an investigation revealed social responsibility breaches as well as AML shortcomings as well.

List of AML failures
As listed in the statements, the AML failures included a lack of adequate customer financial controls, which led to a number of customers wagering “disproportionally to their net income”.

This then led to examples where a customer’s significant gambling activity would constitute harmful behaviour, but where the operator also failed to intervene – essentially marking these players as “low-risk”.

NetBet’s AML and anti-terrorist financing assessments also failed to recognise key factors when assessing gambling spend, such as “the management of third-party business relationships” and “controls of third-country nationals living in the UK”, the UKGC added.

List of social responsibility failures
On the social responsibility side, the investigation found that NetBet failed to recognise general markers of harm, such as overnight play and escalating deposits, in a timely manner – but only after a manual review was conducted.

Following on from the earlier point about cascading gambling activity, the UKGC assessed that the operator lacked “effective customer interaction systems” that minimise the risk for customers.

Lastly, it was also found that NetBet had submitted “inaccurate information” when filing its regulatory return forms. SBC News has reached out to NetBet for a comment.

UKGC extra vigilant as 2025 nears end
As per the settlement, the UKGC reported that the £650,000 paid by NetBet will be used to fund social responsibility causes.

John Pierce, UKGC Director of Enforcement, said: “This case highlights the serious consequences of failing to meet anti-money laundering and social responsibility obligations.

“We expect all operators to take note and ensure their systems are not only well-designed but are working effectively to protect consumers and to keep crime out of gambling.

“The operator was instructed to take immediate action and make significant improvements to its systems and controls. This included strengthening their risk assessments, improving how they identify and respond to indicators of harm, and ensuring the accuracy of the data they report to us.

“Alongside the £650,000 financial penalty, the operator is also required to commission an independent audit of its policies, procedures, and controls to ensure the necessary improvements they have implemented are properly embedded and remain effective in practice.

“Our focus is on ensuring operators meet the standards we expect, and where they fall short, we will intervene.”

In recent weeks, the UKGC has been ramping up its enforcement of AML regulations, already leading up to several high-profile cases.

Earlier in October, Platinum Gaming, which operates FDJ United-owned Unibet in the UK, was issued a whopping £10m penalty over similar social responsibility and AML failures.

The AML clampdown is not limited to just iGaming, however, with the Victoria Gate Casino in Leeds getting its licence suspended whilst the regulator undertakes a review of its AML standards.

All of the above goes to show that the UKGC is not messing around when it comes to financial compliance and regulatory penalties – something that both iGaming and land-based operators should take at heart given the expected tax increases in next year’s Budget.

The UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) has suspended the licence of Aviator-developer Spribe OÜ. The Poland-based company held a software licence with the Commission, but the regulator states it has come across cases of ‘serious non-compliance’ with its hosting requirements. In short, it appears that Spribe has been carrying out casino game hosting without holding the appropriate licence from the UKGC. The company…

William Hill has been reprimanded by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) over a promotional voucher that was deemed to possibly encourage irresponsible play.

The ASA’s report stated that a customer received a voucher from a slot machine in a William Hill betting shop on 3 April 2025 at 11:51am. The voucher had the following text:

“You’ve won a £5 cash match on any game!”

“Redeemable between 03/04/2025 – 03/04/2025 from 05:20 PM – 11:59 PM in any venue”.

Within a complaint to the ASA, it was challenged whether the timeframe between the voucher being received and when it could be redeemed was a breach of the CAP code since it was “socially undesirable by encouraging irresponsible use”.

Despite William Hill arguing that the voucher didn’t breach the code or encourage socially undesirable or irresponsible behaviour, the ASA upheld the complaint and told the operator that the ad must not appear again in its current form and that future promotions must not encourage irresponsible behaviour.

William Hill: voucher not ‘designed to drive repeated play’

The voucher was issued to customers who deposit £50 or more on an eligible gaming machine before 5:20pm on the day that the promotion is issued and valid. This figure is the total value placed in-store, including a customer’s original cash-in and subsequent winnings played again.

Evidence was provided by William Hill to the ASA that the average cash-in in relation to the three-day promotion was “below the average spend for April and May 2025”. Therefore, the operator felt the amount that must be spent “to qualify for the promotion was substantial, nor that the promotion encouraged excessive staking”.

As it was a £5 voucher and could be spent on any game, the operator believed the promotion was “a low-value, one-off reward” and didn’t “involve any progressive elements, wagering multipliers, or additional conditions beyond what was initially displayed”.

William Hill noted it was “not part of a broader incentive structure nor designed to drive repeated play”, adding that the promotion’s terms, including the staking threshold and the redemption timeframe, were “clearly and fully” communicated to customers, and they were “given sufficient information to make an informed decision before participating”.

In addition, key qualifying conditions were “displayed on digital promotional screens in the shop and the voucher reiterated those eligibility conditions”, with the voucher serving as a “confirmation of eligibility which reminded consumers of the pre-disclosed redemption timeframe”.

William Hill also argued that the voucher’s redemption was entirely optional and that customers were free to not redeem the voucher or return later the same day. The operator supplied data too, showing that most customers who qualified for the voucher didn’t redeem it, which they believed demonstrated that customers knew redemption was optional.

The operator described the £5 voucher as ‘modest’ value and “did not believe that at any stage the promotion encouraged a customer to remain on the premises to engage in excessive consumption, nor encouraged irresponsible use”.

Although the promotion began at a later time than when the voucher was awarded, William Hill stated that it “did not encourage participants to remain on the premises and therefore it did not create any time-sensitive pressure to continue playing”, adding that very few customers redeemed the voucher within two hours, with most waiting three hours.

The operator said that the extended time between the voucher being issued and redeemed “strongly indicated” that most customers left and returned later to redeem the voucher, undermining the suggestion that the redemption window “pressured customers to remain in-shop or extend their play”.

William Hill added that any concerns regarding customer behaviour would have been met with a response in line with their polices, as all staff in their shops have received training to identify signs of gambling-related harm, and gaming machines provide prompts to remind customers of their time and money spent and allow customers to set limits.

ASA calls voucher ‘irresponsible’

Acknowledging the operator’s point of view, the ASA has upheld the complaint against William Hill since the timeframe of when the voucher is issued and redeemable “created an incentive for repeated play within a short period, including visiting the betting shop twice in a single day, increasing the risk of consumers gambling more than they otherwise would”.

Since the redemption period was at a later point in the day, the authority noted that participants could only benefit if they returned to the premises or stayed until the start time of the promotion, and that those eligible for the voucher may have already placed several bets earlier the same day.

“We thus considered that linking the reward to a same-day timeframe, particularly at a limited period later on the day, incentivised behaviours that could encourage irresponsible use,” the ASA stated.

“For those reasons, we concluded that the promotion encouraged irresponsible use and breached the Code”, particularly CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 8.5 (Protection of consumers, safety and suitability).

William Hill was told by the ASA that the advert must not appear again in the form complained of and that future promotions must not encourage irresponsible behaviour.

The UK Gambling Commission’s (UKGC) full attention remains on fighting the black market, the regulator’s CEO, Andrew Rhodes, has reaffirmed.

In a speech at the International Association of Gaming Regulators (IAGR) in Toronto, Rhodes made sure to highlight the UKGC’s continuous efforts to hit back at black market operators through a dedicated team created three-and-a-half years ago.

“We make sure there are penalties and disincentives for being in the illegal market, but also one of our obligations under the Gambling Act, which created us as an organisation is we are here to protect children and the vulnerable from being exploited by gambling,” Rhodes said.

Part of the Commission’s targeted campaign against unlicensed operators includes the disruption of online traffic through a close collaboration with search engines.

Rhodes added that he expects the UKGC to report a total of 200,000 URLs by the end of this financial year. As a result, there’s already been “nearly 100,000” blocked websites.

“We’re tracking over 1000 illegal operators as we try to shut them down… if we can remove things from search results, we make it harder to find, so we slow them down.”

Black market still in the spotlight
Despite the UKGC’s efforts, there is an interesting phenomenon going on in the UK where gambling brands that are typically unlicensed to operate are striking high profile sponsorship deals with sports clubs, particularly in the Premier League.

This led to a huge outcry earlier this year when TGP Europe was forced to leave the UK market and cease its white-label operations managing Asia-facing brands like DEBET and bj88 – partners of Wolverhampton Wanderers FC and AFC Bournemouth respectively.

Just last week, Leicester City announced that BC.GAME, another unlicensed operator, will continue to be the club’s principal partner through the 2025/26 season. All these instances are widely viewed as counter-intuitive to what the UKGC is aiming to achieve.

Potential tax hike could complicate things
On top of that, the next budget coming in on 26 November could potentially raise the tax rates for the gambling sector – with the UK Treasury looking at several options on the table.

One of which would be to align all three existing tax systems with the current Remote Gaming Duty (RGD) at 21%, which would impact the retail betting sector the hardest given that the levy there is currently at 15%.

However, another option being discussed is to raise the RGD rate from 21% to 50%, which would undoubtedly cast a huge shadow on the revenues of licensed online gambling operators. This might inadvertently impact the end user cost, leading to more black market migration.

Rhodes addressed taxation during his speech in Toronto, saying: “Now these are going to be really big debates and they’re taking place in many countries at the moment, and it is quite hard sometimes when different factors change to work out exactly what impact each individual component had.

“That’s why in GB, we’ve got an evaluation programme, which is to evaluate the impact, as best we possibly can of the different changes that the Gambling Act Review White Paper has delivered within our country.”