- WillHill argues that therei s no evidence to suggest remote gambling causes a serious social problem.
- Other countries passing gambling regulation did so justifiably to liberalize the market or end state monopolies; the UK has no such premise, its argued.
- Gibraltar Betting and Gaming Association has raised a litigation fund from licensees to fight to challenge the UK’s POC plans.
In testimony given to the Select Committee for Culture, Media and Sport, William Hill has blasted the main provisions of the UK’s proposed the Gambling (Licensing and Advertising) Bill.
The proposed UK legislation comes in two parts. The first part establishes a requirement for all firms offering gambling to UK customers to be licensed by the Gambling Commission. The second stage introduces a “point of consumption” tax levied only on gambling revenues from UK customers.
William Hill makes strong objections to the rationale for the new laws, insisting that “there is no significant social problem caused by remote gambling” and, furthermore, “there is no evidence that UK consumers face a disorderly or unfair remote gambling market; just the opposite.”
In the light of these two main points, William Hill argues that the reason for the new legislation lies elsewhere: “There can be little doubt here that the regulatory proposals are merely being used here as weak cover for the proposed new taxation measures.”
According to the testimony, gaming regulation in other EU countries has taken the form of ending state monopolies and or liberalizing the industry. William Hill argues that such measures are not needed in the UK and that all evidence contrary to the political policy agenda has been ignored.
