Racecourse MPs Urge Government To Halt Affordability Checks Rollout

The opposition to the Gambling Commission’s proposed financial risk assessments (or affordability checks) is gaining further traction. Now, a cross-party group of 19 MPs, representing racecourse constituencies, has stepped into the debate.

In an open letter to Lisa Nandy, sent ahead of the UKGC’s board meeting on Thursday, the message was clear: Pause the rollout of affordability checks until there has been greater scrutiny of the evidence.

Why Racing Fears Financial Damage

British horseracing and betting have a very close relationship. Unlike many other sports, horse racing relies heavily on gambling revenue through levy payments, sponsorship agreements and media rights deals. Many of these revenue streams are linked to betting turnover.

In their letter, the MPs warned that affordability checks could cause ‘lasting damage’ to racecourses and local economies tied to the sport. Racing bodies argue that if checks cannot operate in a genuinely frictionless way, some bettors could migrate toward unlicensed operators.

In the letter, the MPs wrote:

‘...The drift of bettors to the illegal market will cost the Treasury £300m a year in lost revenue….This will result in a significant reduction in betting turnover on racing, with a potential loss to the sport of £250m in the first five years alone.’

Both current and former gambling ministers have stated that financial risk assessments would only be introduced if they proved ‘fully frictionless’. However, critics of the scheme argue that the Gambling Commission’s pilot has already shown that some bettors could still face requests for personal financial documents.

How Opposition To The Checks Has Escalated

The latest intervention from racecourse MPs is only the newest stage in this rapidly escalating debate.

Back in April, more than 400 figures from across British racing signed another open letter to Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy. This letter also called for the policy to be reconsidered. That group included racecourses, trainers, owners, jockey representatives and senior figures from the British Horseracing Authority and Jockey Club.

Since then, criticism of the proposed checks has broadened considerably. In fact, earlier this month, Dr James Noyes resigned from the Gambling Act Review Evaluation Advisory Group. He too had concerns surrounding the rollout of the policy going ahead, without sufficient external scrutiny.

Just days ago, the Betting and Gaming Council warned the Gambling Commission that proceeding with the checks in their current form could leave the regulator open to legal challenge.

Now, the debate has moved firmly into Parliament with this letter from 19 cross-party MPs.

The Gambling Commission maintains that financial risk assessments are intended to protect vulnerable consumers while also remaining frictionless. However, with opposition now coming from racing bodies, betting operators, policy advisers and cross-party MPs alike, it might not be wise for the UKGC to carry on with plans, without independent review.