Progressive Vision: Looking forward to freedom

The government seems confused about its approach to gambling in the UK – showing some laudable tendencies towards liberalisation whilst simultaneously displaying disproportionate nervousness about so-called negative “social effects” and stubbornly insisting on a range of petty regulations.

Gambling in the UK has enormous economic benefits, is harmlessly enjoyed by millions of responsible adults and has even been shown to have a positive impact on an individual’s health and learning. By far the best way of maximising these positives – and minimising the over-hyped negatives – would be a continued and consistent deregulation of the industry. Certainly, there is no case for gambling to be more restricted than the sale of cigarettes or alcohol.

In economic terms, the gambling industry is estimated to be worth £91bn per annum to the UK economy[1]. For a highly regulated industry, with considerable potential to expand, this is a sizeable figure. Many thousands of British jobs depend on gambling and many thousands more could be created with a mature liberalising approach. The evidence from elsewhere in the world is clear. A liberal, deregulating policy to the gaming industry in the microscopic territory of Macau saw its gambling revenues exceeding even those of Las Vegas in 2006[2].

The government’s recent approach to gambling has been mixed – indeed, confused. Whilst the Gambling Act of 2005 places the industry on less of a “black market” footing, it represents a missed opportunity to capitalise on the full benefits of liberalisation.

Firstly, the decision to allow the creation of a super-casino has been put on hold while the “social effects” are examined. In any event, arguments about the location of the super-casino have become hopelessly tied up in arguments about how any given casino might or might not lead to urban regeneration in certain areas. Markets are almost always better at taking these decisions that government quangos or politicians.

Secondly, whilst gambling websites will now be allowed to advertise on television, they can only do so after the 9pm watershed and a substantial proportion (around 40%) of major gambling websites located outside of the European Economic Area will not be allowed to advertise on TV at all. Major beneficiaries of this liberalisation could well be the Gibraltese and Maltese rather than the British. Gaming websites choosing to locate themselves offshore can reap the benefit of the liberalised advertising regime without incurring Britain’s 15% betting duty.

Thirdly, the stricter oversight promised by the newly created Gambling Commission, will mean 6,000 fruit machines in ostensibly non-gaming venues – such as takeaways or mini-cab offices will be phased out by 2009. This will clearly exacerbate the unhealthy impression that gambling is an activity that should only take place in specially recognised “zones” rather than being part and parcel of our everyday life. Furthermore, the commercial outlets which stand to suffer often operate on extremely tight margins and are now being stripped of a potentially lucrative revenue stream. It would be ludicrous for the consequences of gambling reform to be for it to become easier to find a casino where you can play roulette, but harder for you to buy a kebab and get a taxi home.

Advocates of a more liberalised approach to gambling in the United Kingdom can be unashamed in tackling arguments about the negative social impact of gambling head-on. Of course, there are a string of harrowing personal tales of those who have amassed enormous gambling debts, have lost their homes or have stolen from their employers. In September 2007, the suicide of headmaster John Reilly - who had amassed £100,000 of online gambling debts - received widespread coverage in the British media[3]. But however tragic these individual incidents, they need to be put into context. It is an inescapable reality that virtually any form of remotely enjoyable human activity has potentially fatal consequences – for example, the unfortunate deaths of four apparently healthy men in the Great Northern Run in 2005. This did not, thankfully, lead to the setting up of a government Jogging Commission or the passage of an emergency Jogging Act through Parliament.

Furthermore, these isolated incidents need to be put into a statistical context. Nigel Meadows - the coroner in Mr. Reilly’s case - asserted that his suicide illustrated “how gambling in our society is as dangerous as drugs” [4]. No evidence exists to support the Mr. Meadows’ sweeping claim.

In fact, on the very day that Mr. Reilly’s suicide secured so much press coverage, the Gambling Commission released an extensive study into the prevalence of gambling in the United Kingdom. It concluded that – despite the explosion of internet betting – the percentage of adults gambling had actually fallen from 72% in 1999 to 68% today. The most startling finding was that 99% of people who gambled did so “harmlessly”. It’s hard to imagine many forms of leisure activity that could be safer than this. The number of so-called “problem” gamblers had remained constant at around 250,000[5]. The idea that these individuals could be dissuaded from gambling by removing fruit machines from their local chip shop is farcical. In fact, those who advocate prohibitions on gambling would ironically place them at greater risk by encouraging them to engage with black market, criminal-run betting operations.[6]

There is limited research material into the positive personal effects of gambling. It’s obviously impossible to measure the enormous pleasure and excitement that millions of responsible British citizens get from having a flutter, but there have been some attempts to measure possible health and learning benefits. A Yale University study in 2004 found that recreational gamblers aged over 65 reported being in better health than their non-gambling peers – possibly because of the social aspects of gambling, be it poker games with friends or bingo in a church hall. In 2002, the Psychology Department of Southampton University found that bingo was helpful in improving concentration and short-term memory.

Whilst media reports often focus on problems associated with gambling amongst Britain’s children [7], little attention appears yet to have been given to how calculating pot odds or the percentage chances of a flush draw in Texas Hold ’Em can hone one’s mathematical abilities.

Gambling is an enjoyable and fulfilling pursuit. Its contribution to the British economy is considerable, and with real liberalisation, could be substantially enhanced. Restrictions and prohibitions could have the effect of deterring millions of adults from having a flutter, whilst forcing hard-core gamblers into a black market co-ordinated by organised crime. It’s time that the gambling industry – and tens of millions of British gamblers - were set free.

[1] BBC Online report, 1^st September 2007

[2] BBC Online From Our Own Correspondent 1^st March 2007

[3] Manchester Evening News, 19^th September 2007

[4] Ibid

[5] Whilst Progressive Vision also supports a liberalisation of alcohol licensing laws, this figure is worth comparing to the estimated 9m people in the UK who drink at levels which place their health at risk and the estimated c. 33,000 deaths per annum related to alcohol. (BBC, 2002)

[6] Danny Sheridan, sports analyst for USA Today, estimates that the overwhelming majority of bets placed on the 2007 Superbowl in the USA were placed illegally – with only around $100m of $8bn wagered being bet legally in Nevada.

[7] An example is a story in the Daily Telegraph, 12^th March 2007, about a small number of pupils at Harrow who were apparently tired in their lessons having been up late playing internet poker.

GAMBLING