Jockey Club chief warns of threat to jobs and from the black market on eve of affordability checks debate

Nevin Truesdale, whose petition calling for ministers to abandon  affordability checks triggered the key debate on the issue taking place in parliament on Monday, has warned the proposals risk the livelihoods of those working in the racing industry and will fuel the gambling black market.

The Jockey Club's chief executive said British racing is supportive of the government's efforts to update gambling regulation, but warned "one-size-fits-all" checks would not help those at risk of gambling harm and called on the government to explore "more effective" ways of tackling the issue.

Truesdale said: "It's important to remember these proposals would impact people betting on any sport and it's extremely concerning a recent survey conducted by the BHA showed four in ten bettors said they'd be prepared to use an unregulated bookmaker if stringent checks are implemented, and that more than one in four of those surveyed had already been asked for some form of personal proof of funds."

The lowest of the two tiers of checks being proposed would see punters undergoing background financial screening if they lose just £125 a month or £500 in a year.

"Such checks would fail to recognise an individual’s personal circumstances and not effectively take action to intervene if there are signs of gambling vulnerability," said Truesdale. 

"Instead, a better system of increased use of data sharing and government-agreed 'markers of harm' would allow for early, more specific intervention as soon as anyone showed any signs of harmful betting and be a much more effective way to tackle problem gambling with the small minority of individuals whom it impacts."

British racing has warned the checks could cost the sport £50 million a year in lost revenues, while last week the BHA revealed modelling which found the financial blow would result in the loss of between 600 and 1,000 stable staff.

Truesdale said: "Such a large reduction in funding to racing could have huge knock-on implications, not just in reducing the amount of prize-money on offer for participants who rely on racing for income, but could also result in job losses. 

"Whether you're a breeder, trainer, farrier, vet, jockey, or you work in a racing yard, at a racecourse in any capacity or in one of the countless other roles as well as a range of other businesses who depend on racing communities for many of their customers, the proposed checks provide a real threat to some of these vital occupations.

"We want to work with the government to ensure we can find a solution that effectively tackles gambling harm, and also protects the racing industry.”

Last week the Gambling Commission revealed it was to run a pilot of the second tier of checks triggered if a punter runs up a net loss of £1,000 in 24 hours or £2,000 within 90 days, and which would entail more detailed checks of a customer's finances.

The commission has also claimed checks would be frictionless "for the vast majority".

Arena Racing Company chief executive Martin Cruddace has written to the commission seeking a meeting about the pilot and voicing doubts a truly frictionless system can be delivered.

He had previously told ministers affordability checks already introduced by bookmakers had resulted in the loss of more than £1 billion of online betting turnover on British racing since 2021.

Martin Cruddace: wants greater clarity from the Gambling Commission

Looking ahead, Cruddace said: "We're grateful for the support of the parliamentarians who will take part in Monday's debate and hope it will offer them a chance to consider the significant damage these proposals have already had on our industry.

"Equally, I hope it will be the catalyst for further clarity from the Gambling Commission about the upcoming pilot schemes and how they may in turn impact on racing."

Racehorse Owners Association chief executive Charlie Liverton said the debate was "so important" for British racing.

He said: "I hope one of the things that comes out of the debate is a realisation across the house, across every MP, of the importance of British horseracing to both the rural and national economy, along with the realisation that the principle they are looking to support will fundamentally undermine the entire nature and way this great sport is funded. 

"The consequence of these policies is potentially catastrophic for our sport."

Racecourse Association chief executive David Armstrong said he hoped there would be a strong turnout from MPs in response to the thousands of letters they would have received on the issue.

He added: "I hope the debate significantly raises the level of awareness of the harm that will be caused to racing from the proposed affordability checks. 

"Up to 1,000 job losses in the rural economy and losses to the sport of £50 million per annum cannot be ignored and we want as many people as possible, inside and outside parliament, to understand the potential damage to our sport. 

"Racing is so different from casino-style gambling products, but we're all being treated the same."

MPs will debate the petition calling for affordability checks to be scrapped at Westminster Hall on Monday. Watch the debate live on YouTube from 4.30pm.

The debate transcript will be available shortly after its conclusion, while you can follow and join the discussion on X using #PetitionsDebate 

Read these next:

Former Chancellor calls for government to rethink 'ill-advised, blunt and damaging' affordability checks 

'The government is in complete denial of the appalling consequences of these catastrophic policies' 

One in seven - study warns of racing job losses 'on a terrible scale' as a result of affordability checks 

Subscribe to Racing Post Members' Club Ultimate Monthly and get 50% off your first three months! 

Available to new subscribers purchasing Members' Club Ultimate Monthly using code MEMBERS24. First three payments will be charged at £24.98, subscription renews at full monthly price thereafter. To cancel please contact us at least seven days before subscription is due to renew.