iGaming Daily

Charlie Horner (00:22.106)
It's been a tumultuous year for UK gambling in 2026, and today we're going to review the state of the nation through the lens of two contrasting stories. First, former Prime Minister Gordon Brown returns to national headlines by calling for higher taxes on gaming machines to finance a £500m resilience fund intended to protect vulnerable households from unanticipated rise in energy bills. Yet receiving far less attention was GamCare's 2025-26 trustee report.

The frontline treatment charity raised concerns over the transition to the statutory gambling levy and the uncertainty surrounding the future funding and commissioning of support services under NHS England and its partner bodies. Welcome back to iGaming Daily, supported by Optimove, the creator of Positionless Marketing and the number one player engagement solution for sports betting and iGaming operators. I'm Charlie Horner, and today to discuss all of this with me is our editor at large, Ted Menmuer.

And welcome back onto the show, SBC's managing director, Andy McCarran. Ted, how are you?

Ted Menmuir (01:27.416)
Very well, Charlie, this must be an important episode as we got the big man on campus.

Andrew McCarron (01:33.984)
I think it's more dredging the bottom of the barrel, getting my Karen back in.

Ted Menmuir (01:37.518)
I'm

Charlie Horner (01:41.084)
Well it's good to have you both with us. It's you know, it's a a duo perhaps as iconic as as Blair and Brown back in the day. But let's let's discuss what Gordon Brown has to say about UK gambling because it this is the second summer in a row, really, that Gordon Brown has has intervened on gambling policy and and taxation. So Ted we'll we'll come to you first. What is Gordon Brown proposing this time?

Ted Menmuir (02:07.0)
So yeah, I agree, Charlie, this is very much kind of groundhog day for the gambling industry. Gordon Brown was interviewed by the BBC radio and the former PM wants the Labour government to increase machine games duties on machines and arcades and betting shops. So according to his maths, he believes that...

a new measure, tax measure on gaming machines could raise 500 million for a resilience fund to support households with imminent increase in energy bills. That was kind of projected, I think it was projected by the treasury last week that they're gonna increase by about 45%. And again, it's kind of a flashback of last summer. The proposal follows Brown's.

campaign in 2025 to increase higher duties on online gambling licenses which influenced last year's budget set by Rachel Reeves. However, going back to the BBC interview, he hasn't really explained what rate would be required and how the mechanism would be imposed on pubs, binger halls and arcades. There's a lot to kind of poke out here.

Charlie Horner (03:20.987)
Yeah, there certainly is. the the detail seems quite fine at the moment, but I'm I'm sure that will be proposed in due course. Andy, are you surprised that Gordon Brown's come in and targeting the gambling sector for the second year in a row? We should make make listeners aware that Brown was the influential figure behind the remote gaming duty rise last summer.

Andrew McCarron (03:44.458)
Yeah, well, it's it's 25 years now since Gordon Brown, when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer, he basically let the blue touch paper on, certainly on the online gambling industry and the retail betting industry when he changed the taxation on betting from a turnover tax to a gross profits tax. So that switched from

think it was 9 % turnover tax at the time to a 15 % gross profits tax. And by doing that, he basically allowed the industry to be a lot more creative with what it could offer. And without him doing that, the whole FOB-T's wouldn't have...

wouldn't have come about because it wouldn't have been feasible with a turnover tax paying 9 % every time you put a pound on. So I kind of view this through a lens of Brown trying to atone for what he's done because his background, his father was quite famously a...

a church minister and he comes from that kind Presbyterian background where sort of gambling is seen as a vice and it feels to me that he's been captured by the people looking to shut down gambling. So this to me, fact that it's two years on the trot and he's changed the reasoning on both times as well, seems more like an ideological approach compared to

what he's famous for which is the economic approach because back in 2001 when he changed the taxation it was immensely immensely successful. It increased the money that the treasury got in by a significant number and it helped the industry grow.

Andrew McCarron (05:49.927)
While everybody respects him for his economic outlook, I don't believe these calls to increase taxation are for an economic reason.

Charlie Horner (06:00.06)
Yeah, it certainly doesn't seem that way. Ted, y you were you you had a an interesting reaction to to that. D do you wanna a add on to that? Are you surprised at all about Brown's proposals?

Ted Menmuir (06:13.582)
okay, no, I'm just kind of taking what Andy has just said. And to me, look, as a journal, you kind of look at the overall kind of narrative in the context of the story. And just, this is, I think this is really...

really unsurprising here. And it's also in terms of what's being said by Gordon Brown, but also the industry's reaction to it. Like, yes, I get it. It's a former PM and it's a former chancellor. is, you know, grandstanding member of the Labour Party. But to me, it just sounds like the reaction is always the same. The BGC will put out his numbers about how it threatens however many shops, 21,000 jobs, 70 million pound reduction for racing. But this is stuff that's already been said before.

And I think now is it like are we in this kind of a middle of a of a dogfight with the media and should we learn better as the industry to kind of always take this bait? I'm not sure about that.

Charlie Horner (07:14.907)
Yeah, inc it increasingly feels like everyone's entrenched in their positions, in terms of the industry is vehement that, you know, any tax increase or any increase in regulation will will v you know, fuel the black market. And then on the other side the reformists want to take an ideological and public health approach to to the industry. but look, we Andy, you wanted to to jump in there.

Andrew McCarron (07:38.753)
Yeah, I mean, the fact that, again, it is more of an ideological bent, it seems, rather than a coherent economic argument. mean, Joe Streeter, an iGaming expert, did a piece, I think it was yesterday, just talking about the different things that a taxation increase on on machine games has been promised to fund in the past. So

2025 last year, Brown himself was saying it should fund child poverty, battling child poverty rather than increasing it obviously. 2024, Ed Davey was saying that this money should go to the National Health Service. 2022 is grassroots sports. know, and now this year it's the energy crisis, which seems an even just just putting a plaster over something that's happening. Why not sort out the cause of it rather than

increase the funds that you're trying to extract from the government industry.

Ted Menmuir (08:38.808)
But Andy, the maths doesn't add up, but it doesn't matter. So I think this is what we're trying to get across there. Well, okay, well, can Mr. Brown maybe kind of pick on vapes?

Andrew McCarron (08:45.945)
This is why I'm saying it's ideological rather than economic.

Ted Menmuir (08:54.574)
or sugary drinks because that's something's gonna give him 500 pounds and it isn't gonna be getting machine duties and maybe he's got some maths from the Social Market Foundation but even their calculations are kind of in the high tier of about 400 or 400 million max.

It's not adding up for the Labour government how they're to fill these holes, right? And I think that at one point the best message that the industry can come back with is to say we're not that source of funds. And you know that just from our margins and you know that from our reports.

Charlie Horner (09:30.873)
Yeah, I

Andrew McCarron (09:31.083)
Well, all the government needs to do for that is just look at the impact assessment form, the impact assessment that was done for them when they last increased the taxes. Because while it went up in the short term, longer term, the actual taxation take was dropping because the legal market was losing out to the block market, and that's the government's own figures. So if they're not even going to listen to themselves.

It's a funny time for to start listening to the gambling industry.

Charlie Horner (10:03.723)
Yeah, absolutely. Well, I think everyone should be thanking gambling CEOs up and down the country for ending child poverty. but we'll we'll see if they can end the energy crisis as well. you might want to tell that to the gambling CEOs who have been forced to close shops and and cut jobs as well. But look, Andy, Ted will take a very short break and we'll come back and we'll talk a little bit about the GamCare Trustees report.

Charlie Horner (11:02.957)
Welcome back to iGaming Daily. We're gonna take a a small pivot now from the the tax debate and we're gonna talk about frontline prevention services. Ted, you've been looking through the GamCare trustee report this week. tell us a little bit about what was in that report and could you outline how its frontline services developed during the last financial year?

Ted Menmuir (12:51.534)
So, yes, Charlie, and I think, look, in the second half of this podcast, I think we're taking on the more kind of prominent story of how kind of Gam-Care is developing its frontline services. And since the termination of Gamblerware in March, it's clear that Gam-Care is now the gateway for...

or the first line in treatment support of problem gambling in the UK. GambleAware handled more than 115,000 helplines and digital contacts, and it led it leading over to 11,500 referrals, and it supported 3,000 treatment clients through 10,000 sessions, The feedback on what?

Gamcare provides to its users was hit the was detailed on 97 % of those kind of reaching and stating a very kind of positive feedback on the services and kind of yes so we're seeing this kind of build out of the frontline services but it is a charity that again is living through this transition of the gambling the problem gambling levy

and its transition to NHS England and its partners into a new structure. And the trustees have raised a lot of concerns on how that's being applied, what the future of the structure itself is, because GAMCA has to live with a lot of kind of third parties and third sector organisations. And there's just not a lot of feedback there in what's going on and what's being reported to key partners such as this charity.

Charlie Horner (14:27.951)
Yeah, absolutely. Well, the report covers up to March twenty twenty six, which I think is important to make a note of because that's the month where the the transition happened. So most of the statistics within this report are on the the old system compared to the new system where the the statutory levy is gonna be you know the funds are gonna f flow through NHS England, OHID and UKRI.

Ted Menmuir (14:33.57)
Mm-hmm.

Charlie Horner (14:54.007)
Andy, I just want to bring you in now and and could you talk a little bit about that transition and and some of the the conversations and and debates that have happened around that?

Andrew McCarron (15:05.13)
Yeah, I mean, going through the GAMCare report, mean, what is what's clear from the chair, Margo Daly's addressing it. I'm going to read it out because it kind of kind of makes clear the challenges they've had. says the transition from the voluntary to a statutory levy changed how services are funded with commissioning responsibility moving to five separate bodies.

Ted Menmuir (15:29.133)
Mm-hmm.

Andrew McCarron (15:29.586)
across England, Scotland and Wales, each at a different stage of readiness and without a clear coordination infrastructure in place to support such a significant change. And she says, the board's task was to hold the organization's nerve, stay anchored to its values and maintain clarity of purpose when the external environment was pulling in multiple directions. Now this smacks to me of...

something to help problem gambling, which has been massively politicized. And for one of the main service providers in that space to say they've had to keep their nerve amongst all the change just shows you what an absolute shit show it's been to transition across when there's been so much more money pouring into this kind of thing through the statutory levy. And it's just...

It just means that there's so much money being wasted that should be going towards treating problem gambling and helping those with issues. this ideological push to make it go under the NHS, who quite frankly haven't got a clue what they're doing because they've washed their hands of it for so long beforehand. It's just not providing, while it might be ideologically pure, it's just not providing a good

service to those people who need help.

Ted Menmuir (16:58.246)
I think you raise a lot of interesting points here, and especially, mean, on reflection of what Margaret Daly said and in other comments put on by trustees. One of the things I think that GAMK is seeing is just how sensitive and politicized these organizations are that they have to deal with. And you're going from a structure that was very functional with Gamblerware.

and also how it dealt with the actual distribution of funding to, mean, Andy says five, but I mean, I'm going with the main three, which NHS England, that's about to be disbanded, OHID and UK Research. And these are very highly politicised, but highly sensitive.

political departments, right? That deal with, you know, not just, mean, in the case of HID and UK research, with so many kind of elements of the UK society, it's a tricky path. And I think that even if you look at kind of Margaret Daly's statement, it's so kind of politically worded, that tells you everything.

Charlie Horner (18:11.448)
It does.

Andrew McCarron (18:12.032)
I mean, we've what we, sorry, what I was gonna say is what we've got to remember as well. I mean, it wasn't that long ago, relatively speaking, that when Gamble Aware was, should we say throwing its weight around, that it was almost trying to oust Gamble Aware from being the national helpline, not Gamble Aware, Gamcare from being the national helpline until there was a big Ferrari, because...

For so long, GAMCARE had been basically the only help on a national basis funded by the gambling industry itself. But because it was funded by the gambling industry, lot of the, shall we say, problem gambling purists believed they weren't fit to provide this kind of service. And it took a lot of campaigning.

to make sure they were still involved in the mix. Unfortunately, they've come through at the other side because, let's face it, few organizations have got as much experience in helping people with problem government as CAMCAP has.

Charlie Horner (19:16.909)
Yeah, absolutely. but I I think it just you know all of the conversations that we've had in in this podcast today just go to show that you know there's a lot of politically charged conversation and ideology that underpin a lot of this from people who don't necessarily have the expertise to in the industry to understand the the sector that they're trying to regulate, legislate for and tax. well I mean a key example of this, Ted, is that you know

NHS England is one of the main recipients and and well o or organising organisational bodies in charge of you know, handling the the levy. But we've been told by government that NHS England will be shut by the end of the decade. You know, how how serious is that for unter uncertainty in a in a system which is so, so crucial?

Ted Menmuir (20:04.278)
It's massive and they were the kind of body that actually pressured that and it was their kind of physicians that came in and said, this levy cannot have any contact.

with gambling licenses. They were the ones that kind of put the pressure on Gamla Wear. They were the ones that actually put it out to kind of Commons. And then the other thing is that we don't really know. So I think we're dealing with a kind of a double transition of yes, the levy itself, but also what happens with the NHS England. The feedback that organisations are beginning, it's like, hey, don't worry, because this is going to be overseen by what they call kind of an integrated care board and regional structures. Right. So this is going to get that we'll

with kind of very broad language. My fear is that I think GAMCARE is now the front line, but I don't necessarily think that its concerns are being heard and that even if you write, you know, if they get that kind of trustee report out and everything that's been said in there and all the anxieties and concerns, I don't think that there's anyone in the NHS that's actually going to take lead or it is kind of partner bodies too.

Charlie Horner (21:14.661)
We're constantly being told, you know, that the NHS is is struggling and and lacks resources to do what most of its core competencies. So adding the, you know, responsibility for gambling, harm prevention and and treatment just is is another added extra to the workload and to the resource drainage that on that service. Andy, what sense do you get on on this in terms of Gamcare's huge concerns that it has and that it

Potentially not being heard by the NHS or the government or any other commissioners.

Andrew McCarron (21:48.425)
Yeah, the problem Gamcare has got is that it's actually focusing on trying to make people better. And that doesn't seem to count a lot, count for a lot in the, in the current environment. We seem to be working on a system of winners and losers rather than what's actually best for those that need help.

And Gamcare has admirably been focusing on that for, you know, since last century. Certainly when I started writing about the industry in 1998, Gamcare were there and I've been writing about them ever since. But their focus has been on making sure those who need help can get help or at least information about where to get further help. Back in the day, was just Gamcare and Gordon Moody.

Fortunately, they're still going and the infrastructure around helping people with problem gambling has grown exponentially in the 20 odd years since then. But it feels like it's starting to contract now as it becomes more ideological and less about helping those who've got issues.

Charlie Horner (23:08.729)
Yeah, i it it's increasingly feels to me that politics in general is is more like this. It's becoming far more ideological and less pra pragmatic about getting results. Ted, just let's bring things towards a bit of a close now. D do you get the sense that this would be a huge indictment on on the state of UK gambling if if this whole levy transition was was to fail? Do you think this is the the number one story people should be tracking in the UK sector right now?

Ted Menmuir (23:39.503)
Yes, you know, it would be unequivocally the exact point of failure of the gambling review. mean, at the end of the day, you regulate gambling, affected taxes, yes, but you also do it to protect the consumer and protect the vulnerable. And it's not kind of fulfilling what, you know, a key remit in that. And I think for the industry audiences, it just always points back to...

Why try and change something so radically that was working? Why didn't they stage this out? Why did it go to three bodies? And I don't necessarily think that even the three bodies themselves, and I think when the government kind of implemented that, and you know, there was lots of eyes on the IHID and why they got that contract.

And I don't necessarily think that they were the right, the three, yes, the NHS was always going to have a say on the structure, but I just don't necessarily agree with how the kind of those partnerships were struck with who gets to pick, know, who gets to kind of formulate the strategy of the levy and its funding structure. I, you know, I'm going to close out with, I'd love to hear with what Andy has to say about this as someone who's actually tracked.

know, prior to, you know, conflicts even prior to the gambling review.

Andrew McCarron (24:59.602)
Yeah, I mean, I'll be honest with you.

The money that's going in there is more than ever, but I think it's going to be less effective than ever with everything that's going on. if it doesn't get to those people that need help, then the problem gambling rate is likely to rise. And who's going to get the blame for that?

It's not going be NHS. It's not going to be this mechanism. It's going to be the industry again, even though the industry is putting in more money for this than ever. And then there'll be more restrictions and more money to be demanded. And it's going into a less and less efficient system. To be honest with you, gambling industry should be trying to steer this and making sure it is effective and it is working.

as it sounds, they've got the most experience in dealing with this kind of stuff. But because it's so ideological and the industry can't be involved at all, even though they've got the expertise in it, they're of sitting there like cuckolds with their money being wasted through the system and they're just going to get the blame at the end. So it's not efficient, it's not effective, and it's not going to get the help to the people that need it.

Charlie Horner (26:23.099)
Yeah, it's a stark, it's a stark future that we're looking at. and I think this is a really important conversation for us to be having, and I think it's certainly one we'll we'll return to on the show as we as we continue to monitor the the impacts and the fallout of the the statutory levy transformation and the transition. But for now, Andy, thanks ever so much for joining us. It's been great to have you on, sharing your expertise and insights. Ted, thanks for joining me as always. Thanks to Optimu for supporting the show.

And to our listeners, thanks for tuning in to today's episode of iGaming Daily. And come back tomorrow to keep up to date with all the latest global gambling news.