OHID appointed by Government to manage statutory levy
The Government has appointed the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID) as the Prevention Commissioner. Their role will be to use the statutory levy collected from industry to help address problem gambling in Britain. This marks the first major step towards implementing this initiative since consultations in November 2024.
The original statement, released by Stephanie Peacock, Minister for Sport, Media, Civil Society and Youth, was published on 12 February. It has drawn a mixed response.
The statement confirms the government’s plans to implement the proposed statutory levy. It also suggests that the government is acting fast, claiming that it is “a priority for the Government to have the levy in place by April 2025 with funding flowing as soon as possible thereafter”.
The OHID’s new role
The OHID is a sub-department of the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC). Its regular duties include working to improve national health policies, with a broad focus on “reducing health inequalities and keeping people in better health for longer”.
As the new Prevention Commissioner, the OHID will now have the responsibility of allocating funds raised by the levy, and maximising the impact. It was selected for this role because it is believed to be “well-placed to capitalise on its expertise and relationships in this area”.
This applies to England. The same levy will apply in Scotland and Wales where the OHID’s counterparts will assume responsibility for overseeing the distribution of funds.
The levy
The mandatory levy aims to raise between £90 million and £100 million each year. The levy rates are charged as a percentage of each casino or operator’s previous year’s yield as follows:
- 1.1% for online casinos
- 0.5% for casinos and bookmakers
- 0.2% for bingo operators
Controversially, the National Lottery isn't included and for now, at least, will pay no levy.
The levy will be collected by the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) and will be used to fund gambling harm research, prevention and treatment. It has been proposed that the funds be allocated as follows:
- 50% for treatment services
- 30% for prevention initiatives
- 20% for research into gambling-related harm
The recent statement also referred to three other areas which may receive future funding through the initiative:
- Awareness-raising: providing funds to schemes that raise awareness of gambling-related harm through programs similar to Safer Gambling Week
- Local and regional initiatives: tailoring interventions to the specific needs of communities, for a more targeted approach
- Building capacity: expanding the capabilities of front-line support organisations, so that they can more effectively treat problem gamblers
What this means for…
The government and regulators
For the government and UKGC, the introduction of the levy means dependable, predictable funding for public wellbeing. The Labour party may consider this a feather in its cap, but it’s been in the works for some time now. More harm prevention means less strain on other agencies and institutions, including the already-stretched NHS.
By appointing the OHID to this role, however, the government is running the risk of accusations of bias from the industry. It will take some effort and resources to ensure that funds are allocated fairly.
The main risk that the Commission and government are facing is stifling the British gambling industry. If the levy proves to be a heavy-handed or disruptive move, the economy could suffer.
Casinos and operators
We don’t yet know whether casinos will have a say in the process. Hopefully, they will be invited to participate in discussions about how the funds are spent. If the OHID opens the door in this way, operators may be given a voice and a chance to collaborate, rather than simply being given demands.
Casinos and operators will be footing the bill for much of the UK support network. This will mean reduced profits and thinner margins. The amounts in £ terms are likely to be significant and possibly hard to absorb, especially for smaller operations.
One possibility, albeit a worst-case one, would be that British casinos might find themselves at a competitive disadvantage, which could cost the economy dearly and may lead players to flock to illegal or offshore operators. A loss-loss.
Support organisations
Britain has a substantial network of gambling support organisations. GambleAware, one of the cornerstones of this network, responded positively to the announcement, but stressed that current support must “continue to be recognised and sustained within the future system”.
Gordon Moody, the heritage front-line gambling charity, was similarly supportive of the announcement: “It is essential that the new Prevention Commissioner adopts a cohesive approach, working alongside NHS England [...]. This collaboration will build on the positive work already underway and leverage the deep expertise and experience within the current system.”
Some organisations, including Deal Me Out and Regulus Partners, were more critical. They questioned whether the OHID will be able to act impartially, citing its connections to anti-gambling organisations, and suggested that the OHID has used misleading stats to further its anti-gambling stance.
The government has emphasised that preventative measures are “a crucial part of the government’s efforts to tackle gambling-related harm”. This may, in time, result in a lightening of the load borne by gambling charities.
Players
For the most part, this is good news for players. It means that there will be a more equipped, more robust support network for them, in case they should ever need it.
However, increased power in the hands of the OHID could potentially lead to over-regulation in the long run. The more prohibitive its policies are, the tougher things will get for players as well as operators. This might take the shape of harsher limits, or more invasive background checks.
Also, there’s likely to be some degree of a trickle-down effect. The levy will eat into the profits of operators, and some may pass costs on to customers. This might result in fewer bonuses, stricter limits, or reduced loyalty schemes.
The good, the bad and the ambiguous
It’s good news that the government is being proactive, and for the most part the announcement has been welcomed. Support organisations stand to gain more stable funding, enabling them to carry out their work more effectively.
The ‘Prevention Commissioner’ is an important role. Preventing gambling-related harm is a huge part of the battle. Prevention should alleviate some of the pressure on support organisations.
However, the issues raised by Deal Me Out and Regulus Partners must be addressed. It’s vital that, as a government department, the OHID acts impartially. It currently has strong ties to the NHS and anti-gambling groups, potentially introducing a conflict of interests.
There must be a system which ensures that the allocation of funding is fair, inclusive, and not influenced by the OHID’s previous affiliations.
The official statement is a bit thin on details, and many specifics remain to be mentioned. For instance, who are the OHID’s Scottish and Welsh counterparts to be? And who within the OHID is responsible for the final decisions? Can support organisations appeal? Can operators?
Hopefully, answers to these questions are on the way.
Summary
Appointing the OHID seems like a logical move, but one which is not without controversy. It marks a significant step in the government’s plans to address problem gambling, and bringing the levy into play is a move welcomed by many.
The levy will raise a significant amount of what is described by the government as “ringfenced investment”, which the OHID will then distribute accordingly. The current plan is for the levy to come into play with the new financial year, on 6 April.