'Frictionless' affordability checks raise more questions than answers

As might be expected from a review that was launched in 2020 and has been overseen by no fewer than six gambling ministers, the white paper unveiled on Thursday is a fudge: a set of regulatory proposals that aims to protect both the vulnerable minority and the rights of the responsible majority.

In some areas, this has produced reasonably proportionate recommendations. In others, it has yielded what you might call a have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too white paper.

The approach to affordability checks is the ultimate example of this. As featured on numerous occasions on these pages over past months, ordinary bettors loathe these intrusive checks on their finances and see no justification for the state to intervene in personal spending decisions. The racing industry, meanwhile, has repeatedly warned checks will cause thousands of perfectly responsible punters to cease betting or turn to the black market, and by doing so cause a devastating drop in income to the sport.

In a partial victory for common sense, the white paper ostensibly recognises and responds to these concerns. This was by no means guaranteed: previous versions reportedly contained far more draconian affordability checks, while campaigners called for them to be triggered by spend of just £100 a month.

The government has instead opted for two tiers of supposedly 'frictionless' checks. The first tier, triggered by a loss of £125 a month or £500 a year (the equivalent of losing £1.37 a day) and described as a 'financial vulnerability check', is essentially an open source background check, looking for bankruptcies, county court judgements and "average postcode affluence". It will be triggered at what many will regard as an exceptionally low level, but it should at least be genuinely frictionless – if you pass it, that is.

The second tier, triggered by a loss of £1,000 in a 24-hour period or £2,000 over 90 days, is a different story. Described in the white paper as 'enhanced spending checks', these will apparently be conducted via credit reference agencies, supposedly meaning an end to intrusive bookmaker requests for payslips and P60s.

Yet the devil, as ever, is in the details. The white paper concedes the Gambling Commission is still exploring "how more detailed checks could work in practice" and admits the above is only an "expectation". It even concedes that sometimes "information may need to be collected directly from the customer" – in other words: documents, please.

There is much else that is left frustratingly unanswered or vague. Even the lighter 'financial vulnerability checks' raise questions about implementation. Will bookmakers be expected to run this check every time someone loses £125 in a month? How will 'average postcode affluence' work in inner-cities where mansions and social housing can sit side by side?

It is also unclear how firms will interpret the results of these checks. The white paper says "neither the government nor the Gambling Commission will set universal rules on what proportion of a customer's income they should be permitted to gamble", but clearly bookmakers are expected to make a judgement. History suggests this will be handled inconsistently and opaquely, causing yet more frustration for bettors.

Racing has not always valued its core customer, the punter, as it shouldCredit: Alan Crowhurst

There is the question of retail, too. The white paper is focused on online betting, but bricks and mortar bookies have been carrying out affordability checks for months – will they cease? And what will happen to online customers in the here and now, while the above proposals wind their way through yet another tortuous Gambling Commission consultation?

When the dust settles and answers to these and many other questions are finally provided, the outcome of the gambling review will undoubtedly be a more restrictive regulatory environment for punters and financial pain for racing. But it should not be the ruinous fate that anti-betting campaigners sought. That, though, is a reprieve rather than a victory.

Bookmakers must reflect on how their mistakes brought us to this precipice and use this moment as a watershed. They have a moral and commercial duty to ensure the excesses of the past are consigned to history. Every tale, and there have been far too many, of a life ruined by betting a year's salary in an afternoon is first and foremost a tragedy for the individual and family involved, but also a blow to the legitimacy of a hobby and pastime enjoyed responsibly by millions. Gambling must be fair and safe and it must be seen to be fair and safe, for you sense that there will be no more reprieves in future.

Racing, too, can learn from this. The sport has not always valued its core customer, the punter, as it should. Some in the sport even see the link with betting as slightly shameful. Yet the BHA reports more than £350m of funding to the sport is directly tied to betting – if racing wants to preserve this vital source of revenue, it must protect, represent and defend its customers every bit as robustly as it does its welfare record.

That is particularly important because the white paper is by no means the end of this matter, not least because the government fudged the fundamental question of whether the state is ever justified interfering in how we spend our own money. As such, the right to bet will only come under greater scrutiny in the years ahead.

What's your verdict on the white paper? Email us at editor@racingpost.com with the subject 'Gambling review' to share your views following the publication of the gambling review white paper

Read these next:

BHA concern over financial risk checks as government reveals white paper 

Gambling white paper: key plans, affordability checks and what it means 

Three years, six ministers and one white paper: how we got here 

Subscribe today | Get 50% off your first three months 

The Front Runner is our unmissable email newsletter available exclusively to Members' Club Ultimate subscribers. Chris Cook, a four-time Racing Reporter of the Year award winner, provides his take on the day's biggest stories and tips for the upcoming racing every morning from Monday to Friday. Not a Members' Club Ultimate subscriber? Click here to join today and also receive our Ultimate Daily emails plus our full range of fantastic website and newspaper content.