How Much Influence Do Gambling Companies Have On Governments?
In recent times, we’ve seen plenty of stories about industries having influence over government policy thanks to their relationships with members of parliament. The second job scandal came to light when it emerged that Owen Paterson, who had served as the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland under David Cameron and was the MP for North Shropshire, had been paid tens of thousands of pounds to represent the interests of Randox and Lynn’s Country Foods. He ‘repeatedly used his privileged position to benefit two companies for whom he was a paid consultant’.
In 2020, the Cheltenham Festival was allowed to go ahead as the rest of the country was seeing events cancelled, with many people pointing out that the then-Health Secretary Matt Hancock had received as much as £350,000 from wealthy figures in the world of horse racing. The 2020 Festival was considered by many to be akin to a super-spreader event, which is why eyebrows were raised over Hancock’s role in things. It also led some people to ask just how much of an influence over governmental decisions the various gambling companies actually have when it comes down to it.
Money Talks
The one thing that pretty much can’t be argued when it comes to politics is that money talks. It has long been the case that lobbying firms are able to put pressure on members of the government when it is making certain decisions. In recent times, it has also emerged that members of parliament who have received gifts from gambling and betting firms would then vote in a manner that supported the industry’s desires during government reviews and the like. A group of 20 MPs were given gifts and hospitality experiences worth in excess of £74,000 from gambling companies before voting in their favour.
Gambling and betting firms gave companies the likes of tickets to Wimbledon, appearances at the Euros and also race day experiences at some of the biggest meetings. In the way of being on the receiving end of such lavish gifts and experiences, those same MPs have then expressed support for aspects of the gambling industry. That information led to critics of the betting industry fearing that it had been engaged in a ‘charm offensive’ in the build-up to the government’s review of the 2005 Gambling Act, paying to receive the changes that it wants.
The Director of the gambling reform group Clean Up Gambling, Matt Zarb-Cousin, said that he wasn’t surprised, warning that legislators should ‘think twice about accepting hospitality from a sector that derives the majority of its profits from people experiencing harm’. Even so, it didn’t stop the likes of Laurence Robertson talking about the ‘enormous contribution’ made by the betting industry to horse racing, months after having been given a £900 hospitality experience at the Cheltenham Festival. Scott Benton, meanwhile, received hospitality worth £7,500 from betting companies before talking about the ‘economic contribution of casinos’ during a debate in parliament.
It’s Not Just The UK
The interesting thing to note is that it is not just in the United Kingdom where politicians are influenced by the betting industry. In February of 2021, news broke in Austria that suggested that a member of the gambling industry had leveraged politicians in the country to gain advice and support for a business related matter. People in the country immediately started asking whether or not business leaders should be allowed to use their contacts, whether formal or informal, for that such of thing, as well as whether it was proper for parties to accept large donations from such industries.
The problem is that it is immensely difficult to draw a line between what would be considered ‘normal’ lobbying for a company and the moves that take things beyond the normal and into the realm of the inappropriate. Governments will also struggle to find the balance between protecting its citizens and allowing for a free-market economy, yet when it is being directly influenced by the industry that it is charged with limiting, it’s difficult to see that it will be making choices for the right reasons. Gambling isn’t all bad, but its influence definitely needs to be curtailed.
If Reviews Aren’t Free Of Influence, What’s The Point?
If a tobacco company is allowed more influence over the laws around smoking in a country, those laws are likely to be more pro-smoking and therefore less fairly judged than if the tobacco industry’s influence is limited. Similarly, there is almost no point in having a review of the gambling industry if the industry itself is going to be allowed to influence the politicians in terms of how they think things should go. When the British government decided to launch its review of the 2005 Gambling Act, it did so with something of a vague remit.
As time went on, that remit became more specific and virtually all angles of the betting industry began to be looked at. When that happened, more and more lobbyists began to emerge and try to have their say over what should happen with the world of gambling in the United Kingdom. The desire of most was for the review to remain impartial, meaning that the likes of the Association of British Bookmakers couldn’t be allowed to try to influence MPs in the same way that they did during the investigation into changes to the maximum stake on Fixed Odds Betting Terminals.
Unfortunately, the nature of British politics is such that the wrong groups will always have influence. In 2019, gambling operators committed to a 1% levy that would be used towards treatment for gambling addicts. As a result, the then-Culture Secretary, Jeremy Wright, declined the chance to put a statutory levy in place. Within 12 months, gambling companies had reneged on the deal and the money was being put elsewhere. That’s the sort of thing that can happen when politicians in thrall to gambling companies make all the decisions.
