Senet Group backs problem gambling levy
Charity joins RGA in supporting a statutory charge on operators, but warns of risks in implementation
The Senet Group has tentatively backed the introduction of a statutory levy on gambling operators to help fund treatment for problem gambling.
The issue of problem gambling and funding for support was brought up yesterday on the Radio 4 show You and Yours, when GambleAware chair Kate Lampard said the voluntary donations that currently funds the charity were not sufficient.
Lampard said GambleAware was receiving about 80% of the funds it needed, with some firms sending “derisory” contributions of as little as 1p.
The charity fell £5m short of its £13m industry contributions target last year.
And talk of a statutory levy to fund GambleAware has picked up pace in recent months, with the RGA supporting the introduction of such a scheme, and telling the government as such in response to the DCMS consultation on Gaming Machines and Social Responsibility Measures.
The Senet Group, which aims to educate consumers about the risks of gambling, echoed that sentiment yesterday, saying: “If a statutory levy on gambling businesses is the only way to generate the money needed for work across the Research, Education and Treatment agenda then this change has our support.
“The Senet Group is committed to working in partnership across the industry and with the Gambling Commission.”
The growing support for a levy from the industry would seem to make its introduction a formality, but Senet Group CEO George Kidd warned it could be a complex task.
“If there was a positive decision from DCMS on a statutory levy, there would need to be secondary legislation at minimum,” Kidd told EGR.
“And, as I understand it, that would have to designate a public body as the agency responsible for administering and dispersing any levy. The assumption would be this is the Gambling Commission. That, in turn, requires the GC to set up to carry out this role or to create appropriate mechanics for its delegation.
“All of this – when seen against the very considerable progress made in securing around £10m pa now for such activity – might explain why some have been wary of a statutory levy.”