UKGC Withholds Gambling Act Review Files

Article Content

UKGC Cites Costs to Block Release of Gambling Review Documents

The UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) has withheld internal correspondence and reports related to its advice on the landmark review of the Gambling Act 2005. In response to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request dated 1 June 2024, the regulator stated that fulfilling the request would exceed cost limits set by law.

This refusal limits public insight into the detailed discussions and internal analysis that shaped the Commission's formal advice to the government, which ultimately led to the 'High stakes: gambling reform for the digital age' White Paper.

Context: Why This Data Matters

The Gambling Act review is the most significant overhaul of UK gambling laws in nearly two decades. The UKGC, as the industry regulator, played a pivotal role in advising the government on key areas of reform, including measures to tackle problem gambling and new obligations for betting operators. Access to the internal workings behind this advice is crucial for consumers and transparency advocates to understand how decisions affecting player protection were made.

The Request and The Refusal

The FOI request sought access to all correspondence and working reports from January 2020 onwards that contained the keywords "White paper," "Problem gambling," or "Betting operator."

The UKGC confirmed it holds information within the scope of the request but refused to provide it, invoking Section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act. This exemption allows public bodies to refuse requests where the cost of compliance would exceed £450, equivalent to 18 hours of staff time.

In its response, the Commission explained:

"The level of detail you have requested would result in an extremely large volume of potentially relevant records... This information is not stored in a central location and requires a manual review across several Gambling Commission information storage areas, including high volumes of email correspondence."

The regulator estimated that locating, retrieving, and extracting the relevant information would take "in excess of 18 hours."

Significance: What This Means for Transparency

While the UKGC pointed the requester to its already published formal advice, the refusal to release the underlying working documents means the detailed deliberations remain private. This includes internal debates, data analysis, and communications that informed the regulator's final position on critical consumer protection issues.

For consumers, this lack of transparency makes it difficult to scrutinise the process and assess how the regulator balanced consumer safety with industry interests during the formulation of its advice.

The Commission did suggest the requester could submit a narrower, more focused request. However, it also cautioned that even if a refined request fell within the cost limit, the information might still be withheld under other exemptions. This indicates that the internal policy-making process is an area the regulator is keen to protect from public disclosure, leaving key questions about the development of the White Paper unanswered.