There have been rumblings of discontent amongst Conservative members of Parliament this week as ministers have warned Chancellor Philip Hammond that he faces a party rebellion unless a maximum stake of £2 is decided for the UK’s fixed odds betting terminals (FOBTs). The terminals have been the subject of lengthy government review, with pressure from all sides concerning the impact of the decision.
It had been expected until fairly recently that the decision would most likely be the maximum reduction possible, from the current £100 max stake down to £2 (the current minimum), but a surprise announcement from the usually prudent UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) this week supporting a reduction to £30 for “non-slot” based FOBTs has had Tory backbenchers up in arms.
Conservative Minister Sir Peter Bottomly has been particularly vocal in the matter, suggesting that measures to back a higher limit would be defeated and that many Conservatives were willing to support the lowest limits. The principle concern surrounds the machines’ fast-paced, high stakes action, which can potentially lead to addiction and problem gambling, to say nothing of the ability to lose large sums in short periods of time. Sir Peter has stated that he is willing to put in place a motion in Parliament to be voted on across parties, and believes he will have support from MPs from Labour, the SNP and others.
Earlier in the week a group of MPs, including former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith, Carolyn Harris of Labour, and the SNP’s Ronnie Cowan, wrote to the Chancellor to make the case that there was “overwhelming” evidence that the full reduction to £2 was the best decision. The government has previously estimated that such a reduction would cost tax coffers up to half a billion pounds annually. However, this would be somewhat offset, according to proponents of the maximum reduction, by savings on the social ramifications of problem gambling, such as employment issues, mental health and crime.
The group of MPs wrote that, “This money is often lost by those at the lower end of the income distribution, and it is highly questionable that the Government derives significant machine gaming duty revenue from those that can least afford it.”
The UKGC report adds a lot of weight to the argument for a higher limit, and as the government’s statutory advisor, ministers are supposed to put a lot of stock in what this body has to say. For now, however, the FOBT review by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport continues.
