QAAD

What is the current situation?

A national study published in February 2011 indicates that there has been a rise in problem gambling since 2007.  QAAD is pressing for a more cautious approach to regulation in order to ensure that these figures do not get worse.  Click here for QAAD’s briefing on the Prevalence Study results.

QAAD was one of the faith-based groups that gave evidence to the Parliamentary Select Committee which considered the Gambling Act of 2005. We and many others argued against many of the de-regulatory effects of the Bill, because there is evidence from other countries that when gambling increases, the numbers of problem gamblers also tends to rise.

When the Gambling Act was passed, the government agreed that a publicly funded National Prevalence Study would measure any changes, so that corrective action could be taken if a rise in problem gambling occurred.  It has occurred.  Notwithstanding this, the government funding that paid for the National Prevalence Study has been withdrawn.  This is a matter of serious concern.

The Culture Media and Sport and Sport Select Committee in Parliament is currently conducting a review of the Gambling Act.  QAAD has made a strong written representation suggesting several practical measures.  Click here to see our submission.

We are working in partnership with other faith bodies including the Methodist Church, the Salvation Army, the Churches of England and Scotland, the Evangelical Alliance and CARE, to take forward our concerns.

QAAD is pressing for the following specific measures:

• A directly comparable Prevalence Study to be conducted in 2013, to ensure that trends are captured and fully analysed.
• Local Authorities to be given the power to refuse gambling licences if they feel they have too many premises in their areas.
• Powers in the Gambling Act to introduce a levy from the industry be activated in order to support research education and treatment into problem gambling.  The current voluntary fund-raising arrangements have not worked.
• A fully independent  body to disseminate funding for research education and treatment into problem gambling, and to devise a national problem gambling strategy in concert with relevant government departments such as Health.
• Stricter advertising controls
• No further de-regulatory measures until the next Prevalence Survey.
• That the industry be required to contribute to research education and treatment with funds that rise with problem gambling rates.
• forms of gambling that involve fast repetitive features be regulated on the precautionary principle.
• data to be gathered from helping agencies about which forms of gambling, if any, callers find most problematic
• problem gambling in the new casino areas to be particularly closely monitored, including through baseline studies.

QAAD argues for a risk-led approach to problem gambling with particular reference to the following factors:

• We are particularly concerned about fast repetitive forms of gambling (such as slot machines, virtual games known as Fixed Odds Betting Terminals, and internet gambling) which are associated with higher rates of problems.
• FOBTs are mentioned in 25% of calls to the helping agency Gamcare, even though they are only played by 4% of people.  Every betting shop is allowed 4 of these machines; they are extremely profitable and are found in the highest density some of the poorest areas. Answers to Parliamentary questions indicate that numbers increased by 500 in 2008-9 alone.   A mechanism needs to be found to reduce the numbers.
• Local Authorities cannotlimit the number of gambling premises or gaming machines, no matter what the numbers, their cumulative impact, or their impact on the character of an area.
• Problem gambling affects all groups in society, but impacts on those in areas of deprivation are particularly acute and difficult to alleviate.
• Since the Act was passed, the gambling industryhas been allowed to expand the numbers of slot machines or increase the value of stakes and prizes on the basis of an economic case –  even though no further changes were supposed to happen until after the Prevalence Study.
• By contrast, evidence about the risks of making gambling more available and accessible has been minimised. The Prevalence Study results should now underline the need for caution.
• People with a problem gambling parent are much more likely to become problem gamblers themselves.  An extra 100,000 problem gamblers now has long-term consequences as well as presenting immediate suffering.
• More funding is needed from the industry for treatment and support for problem gamblers. A levy would ensure that continuity of funding is provided on a rational basis, rather than an annual struggle for an achievable sum.