SBC News

DCMS has updated the Terms of Reference for the Gambling Levy Programme Board, providing further detail on the governance framework overseeing the distribution of funding for gambling-related harm research, prevention and treatment (RPT) initiatives, projects and programmes under the UK’s new statutory levy.

The Board is structured to bring together relevant UK government departments alongside representative authorities from the Scottish and Welsh governments, reflecting both the cross-departmental scope of levy spending and the devolved nature of health and education policy.

DCMS states that the Board’s principal duty is to ensure that appointed commissioning bodies are delivering on the government’s objectives to improve and expand research, prevention and treatment of gambling-related harm.

The department notes that levy expenditure spans multiple departmental boundaries, making it necessary to establish a formal forum through which stakeholders can collectively monitor the levy’s progress and performance.

As such, the Board holds collective responsibility for overseeing the overall functioning and health of the levy system, including whether it is delivering against agreed objectives and commissioning priorities.

However, the department stresses that the Board does not hold responsibility for decisions on detailed expenditure programmes, which remain the responsibility of the individual commissioning bodies appointed by DCMS.

New leadership for new levy
Under the updated framework, the Gambling Levy is overseen by a role-based Levy Board, rather than by individually appointed public figures.

The Board is chaired by the Director for Sport and Gambling at DCMS, a position currently held by senior civil servant Ben Dean, and is supported by the Deputy Director for Gambling and Lotteries, currently Julie Carney.

DCMS has published an annex confirming that the Board comprises 10 members, all appointed due to their institutional role within the levy system rather than in a personal capacity.

DCMS retains overall responsibility for implementing the statutory levy. Under Section 123 of the Gambling Act 2005, the DCMS Secretary of State — currently Lisa Nandy — or the minister responsible for gambling policy, Baroness Twycross, holds final approval powers over levy funding allocations, alongside HM Treasury.

The Treasury is formally named in the legislation as a joint approver, providing fiscal oversight, though DCMS notes that its engagement is expected to be proportionate, particularly after the levy’s first year of operation.

Operational responsibility for commissioning is distributed across specialist departments. DHSC leads on treatment and public health, overseeing both NHS England as the treatment commissioning body and the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID) as the prevention lead.

DSIT acts as the sponsoring department for research through UK Research and Innovation (UKRI). Meanwhile, the Scottish and Welsh governments retain responsibility for prevention and treatment spending within their respective jurisdictions, reflecting the devolved status of health and education policy.

The implementation of the RPT levy – formerly the research, education and treatment (RET) levy – is one of the biggest ongoing adjustments for UK gambling, though next year’s tax raises will likely take this mantle from it.

Changes include the levy’s mandatory status, as well as the NHS taking over the lead from GambleAware as the main commissioner of treatment projects – a move that has led to the planned dissolution of GambleAware in March next year, wrapping up over 20 years of activity.

Flutter Entertainment has reached a £2m regulatory settlement with the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) over social responsibility failures relating to customer interaction with its Paddy Power Betfair brands.

Social responsibility failures listed by the UKGC included having systems “not sensitive enough to identify indicators of harm”, resulting in customers making significant losses, deposits, stakes or activity before being identified for interaction.

In response, a Flutter UKI spokesperson has told iGaming Expert that there is “no suggestion” from the commission that any of the customers reviewed experienced any harm and that the operator believes it leads the industry in player protection.

Won’t be repeated

Flutter told iGaming Expert that the issues spotlighted in the UKGC investigation will not occur again.

“Flutter takes its safer gambling responsibilities incredibly seriously and we firmly believe that we lead the industry in player protection,” said a Flutter UKI spokesperson.

“Customer safety is our number one priority and there is no suggestion that any of the customers reviewed by the Gambling Commission experienced any harm. Our controls have evolved significantly and we recently introduced a next generation customer safety platform, with the vast majority of checks now happening in real-time.

“As such, we are confident that the issues highlighted by the Commission in its public statement would not be repeated today. We continue to invest in our technology and our people to raise standards in the regulated industry.”

This is the second time Paddy Power Betfair has faced regulatory action from the UKGC, as the operator was fined £490,000 for marketing to vulnerable customers in 2023.

Social responsibility failures

The UKGC stated that four remote operators, trading under the names Paddy Power and Betfair – PPB Entertainment Limited, PPB Counterparty Services Limited, Betfair Casino Limited, and TSE Malta LP – will pay the money as part of the settlement with the commission.

As previously mentioned, the listed social responsibility failures for Paddy Power Betfair included not having sensitive enough systems in place to identify harm indicators:

One customer deposited £12,000 over 15 days before they were identified for review.

Another customer deposited £25,000 in 25 days before being contacted.

A third customer lost £12,300 in five weeks before being identified for an interaction.

A fourth customer staked £86,000 over 16 days during which time they lost £6,000. No manual account review took place despite the high velocity of spend.

A fifth customer displayed concerning behaviour in terms of intense spikes in activity without interaction, with their longest session throughout 17 days being seven hours and 46 minutes. Over 300 bets amounting to £20,000 were placed in this period. Their gambling behaviour was only identified as an indicator of harm after hitting a loss trigger, at which time the account was manually reviewed.

Fully cooperative

However, the UKGC did list mitigating factors, as they said Paddy Power Betfair put an action plan in place swiftly that was designed to remedy the failings and provided updates, with some improvements taking place before the compliance assessment.

In addition, the operator was said to be fully cooperative with the commission’s investigation throughout, being open and collaborative and providing information by agreed deadlines. Paddy Power Betfair was also said to have “accepted the failings at an appropriately early stage in the investigation”.

John Pierce, Director of Enforcement at the UKGC, added: “This £2m settlement reflects the seriousness of the failings identified and the importance of meeting social responsibility and customer interaction standards.

“Our compliance assessment in 2024 uncovered examples where interactions fell far short of what is required. These failings should never have occurred. While the licensees co-operated fully with the investigation, accepted the failings early, and implemented an action plan quickly, this immediate response is the minimum we expect from operators when serious shortcomings are identified.

“Operators must ensure systems to identify and address harm work effectively and at the right time. Over-reliance on automation and failure to intervene when clear harm indicators are present exposes consumers to unnecessary risk. Where we find failings, we will act decisively to protect players.”