Reading Time: 3 minutes
Tom Farrell, ClearStake Chief Marketing Officer
Ireland’s Gambling Regulation Bill may not seem to be of concern for anyone outside of the Emerald Isle, even with Ireland’s outsized influence in the worlds of gambling and horse racing. The recent controversy surrounding a proposed ban of all television gambling advertisements before the 9pm watershed is a warning for anyone who will listen.
This ban will cover all TV channels, including RacingTV, Sky Sports Racing, and Sky Sports Racing. Anyone who watches these channels knows that they depend on gambling company advertising. It is so dependent that, if the bill passes, both channels may not be available in Ireland.
It is unclear what effect this will have, but many commentators are raising the alarm. Ted Walsh is of the opinion that “This will be a catastrophe“. It is difficult to disagree with his assessment. It will effectively remove Irish racing from airwaves, except for a few key events. This is sure to harm the industry over the medium-term. Gambling operators will also suffer a loss of revenue, as viewers bet on the races they watch.
Will it happen? If I were a bet man (ahem), I’d support amendments that would allow for exceptions to be made to the bill in order to allow dedicated racing channels. It’s not a done deal and hasn’t yet happened. It’s foolish to think that everything will be sorted out, and then sleepwalk towards disaster.
What is the larger lesson? Continue reading.
The state of gambling today
Let’s face the facts. Most governments in countries that allow gambling classify it as a problem they have to deal with. These governments want to protect their citizens and will look for ways to do so.
While a gambling-advertising ban ‘before watershed’ in 2023 might seem ridiculous to me or you, a government that is ‘doing’ something about gambling will see it as an option. In this case, the government is taking advantage of it. Anyone who has followed recent history will know that expecting governments to make rational, proportionate decisions all the time is not always wise. This is what happens when it is left up to them to find a solution for protecting themselves.
You can probably guess where this is heading by now: the gambling industry must actively engage with the responsibility of protecting our customers. Gambling operators are the only ones who truly understand the issues. They should bring sensible and proportionate solutions to the table. We would not have the ban on advertising that is being proposed in Ireland if gambling operators were to be absent.
In the end, the goal is maximising revenue while minimising harm. This ban does both, I believe.
What are the alternatives? Anyone who regularly reads the Racing Post in Ireland would be forgiven if they thought that absolutely was not an option.
They have therefore probably eliminated affordability checks (despite the fact AML legislation requires the checking of financial documents regardless), and settled on an alternative which has the potential to do significant damage to industry. All triples!
Let’s paint a slightly different image to finish.
The gambling operators and their representatives should engage in constructive dialogue with the government to find solutions which, as mentioned above, minimise harm while maximising revenue. This could include affordability tests integrated with AML requirements, as hinted in the UK White Paper. Legislators can ‘do’ something, but it is something targeted to ensure those who need to be protected, are, while those who want to gamble freely, can, resulting in an increase to revenue.
Isn’t this a better solution than a few random interventions that could endanger the entire industry? This is only possible if the industry acts. Let’s do something about it.
