GC Withholds Names of Firms Probed for Misusing Stats
Illustration for GC Withholds Names of Firms Probed for Misusing Stats

Article Content

A Freedom of Information (FOI) response has revealed that the Gambling Commission (GC) has referred organisations to the UK’s statistics watchdog over the “potential misuse of statistics,” but is withholding their identities from the public.

The disclosure, dated 26 July 2024, confirms that correspondence took place between the GC and the Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR) from October 2023 onwards. However, the Commission has refused to release all the requested information, citing a law enforcement exemption to keep the names of the organisations secret.

What the FOI Reveals

The request asked for all correspondence between the two regulators. While the GC released a heavily redacted document, it confirmed it had withheld a number of emails in their entirety.

The Commission’s response states this withheld information “relates to conversations with the OSR regarding organisations which the Gambling Commission have referred to them for the potential misuse of statistics.”

This confirms that the GC is actively monitoring the use of statistics within the sector it regulates and is escalating concerns to the appropriate authority. However, the public is not permitted to know which organisations are under this scrutiny.

Why This Matters to Consumers

Statistics are a powerful tool used by companies to demonstrate safety, fairness, and social responsibility. They are also used to influence public debate and government policy. If organisations are misusing statistics, it could mislead consumers, policymakers, and the public about the true nature of gambling-related products and their associated risks.

For consumers, accurate and trustworthy data is essential for making informed decisions. The revelation that organisations have been referred for potentially misusing such data is a significant consumer protection issue.

The Justification for Secrecy

The Gambling Commission has justified its refusal to name the organisations by using Section 31 of the Freedom of Information Act, an exemption related to law enforcement and regulatory functions.

The regulator argues that disclosing the names would:

  • Prejudice the OSR’s ability to conduct its regulatory functions effectively.
  • Undermine the trust the OSR needs to carry out its work, much of which is conducted privately.
  • Impair the OSR’s ability to regulate, which would be against the public interest.

In its public interest test, the GC acknowledged the need for transparency but concluded that the public interest is “better served by withholding this information, at this time.” It stated this ensures the OSR can perform its regulatory duties “without interference.”

Industry Significance

The Commission’s action highlights a tension between regulatory process and public transparency. While the GC is taking steps to address the potential misuse of statistics, its reliance on exemptions means consumers and the public remain unaware of which organisations have been flagged for review. The OSR maintains a public Issues Log, but the information withheld by the GC does not appear to be part of this public record at present.

J

Written by

Regulatory Affairs Editor

LLB (Hons) in Law, University of Bristol. Postgraduate Diploma in Financial Regulation, University of Reading.

James has spent 12 years in gambling compliance and regulatory technology, previously working as Senior Compliance Analyst at a UK-based regulatory consultancy advising licensed operators on LCCP adherence.

Tags

Gambling Commission UKGC Freedom of Information FOI Office for Statistics Regulation OSR statistics transparency

More Insights