Surveillance begins to creep in...

In the rapidly evolving world of gambling, pressing concerns are emerging that hold significant implications for consumers, operators, and regulatory bodies alike, writes

SBC’s Content Director

TED MENMUIR,

and Editor of SBC News.

Surveillance has been present in recent discussions surrounding the UK Government’s Gambling Act Review and across various European nations, emphasising its increased relevance to customer safeguards and reporting duties for licensed operators.

From the UK Government’s ‘High Stakes: Gambling Reform for the Digital Age’ White Paper, it is clear that regulations are shifting towards a more nuanced approach and protective stance.

The Government emphasises that it does not intend to set “a blanket rule on how much of their income adults should be able to spend on gambling”, but rather upholds the principle that “people should be free to spend their money how they see fit”.

However, in Europe, some authorities are calling for increased surveillance and monitoring, with Spain’s regulator moving towards cross-operator deposit limits. While intentions may be noble, the complexity of implementing such measures without infringing on personal freedoms is a significant challenge.

PROTECTIVE OR INTRUSIVE?

The White Paper’s proposal for the inclusion of more prescriptive rules on when online gambling operators must check customers’ finances brings forth the theme of surveillance. These checks aim to provide “much greater insight into a customer’s financial position” but also raise questions about privacy and individual rights.

Andrew Rhodes, CEO of the UK’s Gambling Commission, described a system of state monitoring of all gambling as “desirable, but technically difficult”, and illustrated his point with a boozy analogy.

“If the ‘desirable’ system of monitoring envisaged by the Gambling Commission were to be applied to pubs, landlords may be required to check the destination of each drink served and to seek assurance that consumption remained within the recommended limit of 14 units a week.”

The comparison underscores the fine line between protective surveillance and overreach, a tension echoed throughout Europe.

A push for universal monitoring of wagering at the individual consumer level presents clear advantages but also significant trade-offs, including potential resentment by consumers and difficulties in implementation.

Intertwining Issues

The UK’s approach to reform emphasises the need for unintrusive, light-touch checks, balanced with a recommendation of enhanced checks for higher levels of spend that may indicate harm.

In contrast, the pan-European discussion focuses on the ethics and practicalities of universal state surveillance of gambling. The question of how far the state should surveil its citizens for ‘their own good’ is a contentious one, with concerns about potential infringement on personal liberties.

An important aspect of the discussion is the potential for unintended consequences. In Europe, the costs of requiring nonremote operators to comply with surveillance measures have been described as “ruinous for many”, bringing a risk of the closure of numerous licensed venues.

The UK’s perspective also raises questions about potential negative outcomes, particularly concerning individuals who may seek to avoid the proposed enhanced checks. This could drive them towards the unregulated market and expose them to even greater risks.

The advent of open banking represents a promising avenue to monitor gambling without direct state intervention. These systems can provide a balanced approach by offering individual consent and utilising existing mechanisms to track spending.

However, technological solutions are not without their challenges either. Even in the UK, where banks have created opportunities for consumers to set limits on their gambling expenditure, the system is not comprehensive, and practical implementation may present obstacles.

Anxieties Will Remain

The coming years will see continued debate as governments and regulators seek to tread a fine line that balances consumer protection with the preservation of freedoms. Technological innovations may offer new paths forward, but challenges remain.

In the end, the success of these efforts will depend on collaboration, thoughtful consideration of the multifaceted nature of gambling, and an unwavering commitment to principles that respect both individual rights and societal responsibilities.

The stakes are indeed high, and the world is watching to see how these themes of regulation and surveillance shape the future of gambling.

Content is King? Distribution is