Affordability Checks Pose ‘Existential Threat’ to British Horse Racing

Posted on: February 27, 2024, 08:18h. 

Last updated on: February 27, 2024, 12:04h.

Philip Conneller @casinoorgphilc Read More
Expertise: Gaming Business, Regulation, Tribal Gaming.

Proposed affordability checks for UK gamblers could spell curtains for British horse racing, industry stakeholders fear.

Affordability checks, UK horse racing, Jockey Club, petition, Conor McGinn, Paul Blomfield
St. Helens North MP Conor McGinn addressing Parliament in December 2022. On Monday, he described affordability checks as “a response to anecdote and emotion, government overreach, and an infringement on the right of the individual.” (Image: The Independent)

The planned checks could be triggered by losses of as little as £125 (US$159) in 30 days, or £500 (US$ 634) in a year. This could result in a hit of £250 million (US$ 316 million) to racing over the next five years — money it can ill afford to lose. Prize money in British racing already compares unfavorably to other countries, and a dwindling industry will cost jobs, according to the Jockey Club.

Critics of affordability checks argue they are an unwelcome intrusion that will drive vulnerable gamblers to black market operators. They also note that the proposed £500 per year loss trigger equates to just £1.37 a day.

Revenue Already Down

Horseracing receives £350 million a year from the regulated gambling industry through sponsorship, media rights, and betting levy payments. But the racing industry says revenues from betting have fallen by 15% to 20% in the past few months, which it claims is a direct consequence of nonmandatory trials of affordability checks by operators.

A Jockey Club petition that asks the government to “abandon the planned implementation of affordability checks for some people who want to place a bet” quickly garnered the 100K-plus signatures required to trigger a debate in the Houses of Parliament. That debate took place Monday.

‘Bad Policy’

In it, Independent MP for St Helens North Conor McGinn described affordability checks as “bad policy in terms of the concept and the philosophy behind it, its purpose, and indeed its efficacy in addressing that purported purpose.”

It was “incoherent,” and “a response to anecdote and emotion, government overreach, and an infringement on the right of the individual,” he said. “On no other legal leisure activity in the UK has the Government set out spending limits in this fashion.”

The affordability checks would have a “detrimental, disproportionate and frankly, existential impact on British horseracing,” he added.

‘Health Issue’

Labour MP for Sheffield Central Paul Blomfield complained, however, horseracing is “being used as a wedge issue to tackle a different problem.”

If this is a health issue, we need to have a prevention strategy, just as we do with other health problems,” he said. “Affordability checks will play an important role. They must be set independently rather than by the industry and set at a level that will protect those who need them most.

Blomfield said he recognizes that many people enjoy betting safely and without harm, and so affordability checks should be frictionless. But he urged the government not to lose sight of the fact that the checks are about “protecting people from harm and ensuring that the gambling industry is regulated in the right way.”