'This policy has been a mistake' - MPs call for review into affordability checks in parliamentary debate

In a concerted display of support for horseracing, MPs from across Britain and Northern Ireland lined up during a debate in Westminster Hall to spell out the pernicious impact on the sport of proposed affordability checks.

Matt Hancock, whose West Suffolk constituency contains Newmarket, described the plans as a “really serious policy error” from the government that must be immediately reviewed by gambling minister Stuart Andrew.

Adam Afriyie, Conservative MP for Windsor, said the checks would drive bettors to the black market, while colleague Jerome Mayhew, who represents Broadland in Norfolk, urged Andrew to “follow the evidence and not ideology”.

Hancock, a former culture and health secretary for the Conservative government who now stands as an independent MP, stressed that affordability checks on gamblers were already taking place and were having a “counterproductive” impact on preventing problem gambling.

In a debate on the future of horseracing, prompted by the government’s white paper and the Gambling Commission’s gambling review consultation, he said: “There’s a case for a really serious policy error going on that we need to fix and it’s having a very serious impact.

“Nobody speaks more strongly about the need to support problem gambling than me, but the way the Gambling Commission is bringing in these so-called affordability checks makes people move from gambling on reputable platforms to unregulated gambling sites. This is having a direct opposite purpose to the intention.

Matt Hancock: urged the government to act on affordability checks

“Many, many people have already closed their betting accounts because they have refused to give highly personal financial information and, frankly, I can understand why. It’s happening already and before the minister has set out his view. It’s in response to the white paper – not to government policy – and they are getting this wrong and they are damaging the very purposes they are setting out to achieve.

“The minister can already act on this simply by setting out that the current way affordability checks are being put in place is counterproductive. This policy has been a mistake and the minister needs to change it.”

The consequences to racing from the potential impact of affordability checks were also highlighted by MPs Philip Davies, Laura Farris and Laurence Robertson, as well as Stephanie Peacock, the shadow gambling minister.

Hancock also urged the government to press forward with reforms to the levy, as did Nadhim Zahawi, the former Chancellor of the Exchequer, who also flagged the issues being caused by affordability checks.

“I would really welcome the minister being cognisant that there’s already a problem here as to why his department and the Gambling Commission seem to peddle what I would describe as drivel around affordability checks being frictionless and racing would not be damaged,” he said. “Clearly there’s damage being done to the sport’s finances. We can pull a levy on overseas racing. It’s a no-brainer to get it done – it should happen now.”

Conservative colleague Afriyie said: “If the checks are introduced, all that will happen is that reasonable people who occasionally bet on horses will go to a black market site where there will be no checks whatsoever. In fact, they will be exposed to all sorts of risks that we do not want, and there will be no revenue to UK horseracing.”

Mayhew, whose constituency includes Fakenham racecourse, said: “The Gambling Act review is something which is causing Fakenham huge concern. You only have to read the Racing Post and you can see the multiple accounts of people changing their betting habits even before these proposals come in. If we are worried about unintended consequences, I encourage the minister during this welcome consultation to follow the evidence and not ideology.”

Andrew, who revealed the Gambling Commission had over 3,500 responses to its recent consultation, described racing as a “powerhouse industry” that needed to be looked after and said he planned to visit a training yard shortly.

He said: “Concerns have been raised by the BHA and other stakeholders in the industry as to the impact of financial risk checks that were set out in the government’s white paper. I want to reassure everyone that I have heard these concerns and I take them very seriously.”

Gambling minister Stuart Andrew: "I have heard these concerns and I take them very seriously"

He added: “We want the checks themselves to be painless for the overwhelming majority of customers and neither the government nor the Gambling Commission should put a blanket cap on how much money people spend on gambling.

“The government is keen to ensure that measures do not adversely affect racing or interrupt the customer journey. They also cannot push away high net worth individuals such as owners and trainers who are invested in the sport, because we want to protect those at risk of harm but with minimal disruption to the majority who I recognise place bets on horseracing with no ill effect.”

What they said

We ought to acknowledge that [horseracing] is one of the big attractors to the UK in a broader sense, in the same way as our cultural offer, other sporting events and architecture are. It is part of the whole scene that makes us attractive for inward investment and inward workers.
John Spellar, MP for Warley

British horseracing is the best in the world with the iconic races – it’s a fantastic sport. But it is a sport that is under threat and I know for sure that the government will not want to do any damage at all to the industry.
Laurence Robertson, MP for Tewkesbury

The whole future of smaller racecourses such as Market Rasen is now being put in jeopardy by these affordability tests on betting.
Sir Edward Leigh, MP for Gainsborough

It is so important for horseracing to have that contract with the public and the public consent for that great sport to continue. I believe racing gets that. The whip review has started that work, and I very much welcome the Grand National’s changes for next year.
Neil Hudson, MP for Penrith and The Border

As well as ensuring the law protects children and adults vulnerable to gambling harms, it’s important to ensure that the regulation recognises that millions of people enjoy betting safely and without harm. The government has to be clear on how it will ensure affordability checks are frictionless for consumers as they have promised. The Labour Party acknowledges the huge contribution horseracing makes to both our culture and our economy. It’s really important that we protect the future of the industry.
Stephanie Peacock, MP for Barnsley East

Let me illustrate how absurd the situation is. A racehorse owner might buy ten horses for £1 million at the sales, none of which is subject to affordability checks. They put those horses in training and have fees of £250,000 a year, none of which is subject to affordability checks. And yet if they happen to spend £2,000 betting on those horses over a 90-day period they will, at the government's behest, be subject to an enhanced affordability check.
Philip Davies, MP for Shipley

Read more on the Gambling Review here:

Owners' body calls on members to be granted 'common sense exemption' from affordability checks 

The Gambling Commission consultation has closed - what happens next? 

More than half of punters prepared to bet significantly less or walk away from racing over affordability checks, survey reveals 

The jumps season is coming! Pick up your copy of The Big Jump Off, out now and packed with everything you need for the 2023-24 National Hunt season. Our brilliant 72-page supplement, including ante-post tips, guest columnists, top trainer profiles, divisional analysis and much more, is available to order from the Racing Post shop here.