Correspondence with the Gambling Commission
Request
Please can you provide me with all correspondence between the Gambling Commission and Gambling With Lives between 1st January 2022 and the present?
Please can you supply me with copies of all correspondence between the Gambling Commission and Professor Heather Wardle of HW Research / the University of Glasgow between 1st January 2021 and the present?
Response
Thank you for your request which has been processed under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
Correspondence with Professor Heather Wardle
Firstly, in your email you have requested copies of all correspondence between the Gambling Commission and Professor Heather Wardle of HW Research/the University of Glasgow between 1st January 2021 and 7th February 2024.
The Gambling Commission can confirm that no information is held in relation to this part of your request.
Correspondence with Gambling with Lives
Additionally, you have requested all correspondence between the Gambling Commission and Gambling with Lives between 1st January 2022 and 7th February 2024.
We have enclosed some of the information you have requested. The Commission may refuse requests in full or in part in certain circumstances and, having considered your request, the Commission considers that some of the information held within the scope of your request is exempt.
The exemptions the Commission has relied upon are as follows:
Section 40(2) - Personal Information
Section 40(2) of FOIA exempts information from disclosure if it constitutes personal data and one of the conditions in either sections 40(3A), (3B) or (4A) are met.
In accordance with section 40(3A)(a) of FOIA, personal data is exempt from disclosure if disclosure would contravene any of the data protection principles. Therefore, in order to disclose this information, the Commission must be satisfied it has a lawful basis to do so.
The Data Protection Act 2018 requires the processing of personal data to, amongst other matters, be fair and lawful.
Officials have considered the request and do not consider there is a lawful basis for disclosure of the data. For example, the Commission considers that it would be disproportionate for us to publicly disclose the personal data of individuals, as there is no strong public interest in doing so. There is also no expectation that the personal information of these individuals will be disclosed in the context in which it is held. Please note, however, that some personal data has not been redacted. The personal data includes senior individuals such as MP’s and the Gambling Commission’s Chief Executive Officer.
On balance, Officials do not consider there is a legitimate public interest in disclosing the personal data and it would not be fair to do so. This information is therefore exempt under section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
Section 41 - Confidentiality
Section 41 provides an exemption under the FOIA from the right to access information where the information was provided to the public authority in confidence.
Information will be covered by Section 41 if:
- it was obtained by the Commission from any other person (including another public authority),
- its disclosure would constitute a breach of confidence actionable by that or any other person.
When deciding if disclosure would constitute a breach of confidence, the Commission has to consider:
- Whether the information has the quality of confidence.
- Whether it was imparted in circumstances imparting an obligation of confidence, and
- Whether disclosure would be an unauthorised use of the information to the detriment of the confider.
Some information included within the correspondence was provided to the Commission in confidence. This related to a Stage One Proposal for funding through Regulatory Settlements. Officials consider this information has the relevant quality of confidence and was imparted in circumstances imparting an obligation of confidence. We also consider the information carries with it an obligation of confidence which are implicit within the circumstances of the disclosure.
Having considered your request and the information falling within the scope of your request, the Commission has concluded that disclosure would constitute a breach of confidence, and that third parties would have an actionable claim for breach of confidence if this information was disclosed.
The Commission considers that the public interest in disclosing this information is outweighed by the wider public interest in preserving the principle of confidentiality, and the impact that disclosure would have on the interests of the third parties.
The Commission depends and relies on the free flow of confidential information from stakeholders that contribute to its statutory functions.
Section 41 is designed to give those who provide confidential information to public authorities, a degree of assurance that their confidences will continue to be respected, should the information fall within the scope of a FOIA request.
Therefore, on balance, the information that falls within the scope of this exemption will not be disclosed.
Section 31 - Law Enforcement
Information relating to our regulatory activity other than what is made publicly available, is exempt from disclosure under section 31(1)g of the FOIA (‘law enforcement’) and therefore will not be released.
Section 31(1)(g) exempts information whose disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the exercise by any public authority of its functions for any of the purposes specified in subsection (2).
The Commission considers the subsections below apply and therefore the information is exempt from disclosure:
i. Subsection 31(2)(c) refers to the purpose of ascertaining whether circumstances which would justify regulatory action in pursuance of any enactment exist or may arise,
ii. Subsection 31(2)(d) refers to the purpose of ascertaining a person’s fitness or competence in relation to the management of bodies corporate or in relation to any profession or other activity which he is, or seeks to become, authorised to carry on.
Public interest test
The factors the Commission has considered when applying the public interest test have been detailed below.
Arguments in favour of disclosure:
- The Commission is a public body which is required to regulate the gambling industry in the public interest. There is therefore a public interest in members of the public having confidence the Commission is being open and honest with the information it holds so that it can be held to account.
- It is important that the public are assured that the Commission is carrying out its functions in ensuring that any individuals or organisations who are involved in providing gambling facilities to the public have undergone the necessary assessments and will uphold the licencing objectives ensuring that consumers are protected.
- Disclosure of the requested information could demonstrate to stakeholders and relevant parties how and when the Commission communicates with organisations. Furthermore, this disclosure may encourage stakeholders to work with us and contribute to our programme of work, increasing confidence in the Commission as a regulator and its ability to uphold the law.
Arguments in favour of maintaining the exemption:
- The Commission has robust and effective processes and procedures in place which are utilised when assessing existing licensees. These procedures and processes have been put in place to minimise the risk of an operator continuing to provide gambling services where they do not meet the required standards. This demonstrates to the public at large that they can have confidence in the Commission’s compliance assessment processes.
- There is an expectation of confidence in much of the Commission’s work, particularly when discussing areas of a licensee’s compliance with the LCCP. It is the impact on this work of the Commission which is more likely to be affected by disclosure.
- Disclosure of this information would be likely to lead to reluctance from licensees to provide information to the Commission in the future, which would have a substantial adverse effect on the Commission’s ability to carry out its regulatory functions.
- Disclosure of this information would also undermine the Commission's ability to uphold the licensing objectives which would impact on the trust and confidence of the public in it as a regulator.
Weighing the balance
The Commission acknowledges that there is a public interest in promoting the accountability and transparency of public authorities and the importance of having sufficient information in the public domain to support consumers with their choice of operator, however, disclosure of the information would be damaging to the Commission as a regulatory body which ultimately serves to protect the wider public interest.
It is important that the public are assured that the Commission is carrying out its functions in ensuring that any individuals/organisations who are involved in providing gambling facilities to the public have undergone the necessary assessments and will uphold the licencing objectives ensuring that consumers are protected.
However, there is a strong public interest in preserving the processes that the Commission has in place to assess operators’ compliance with the LCCP and identify any operators who will be unable to comply with the licensing requirements. The public trust that the Commission has robust processes in place to assess operators so that when they use the services provided by an operator, they are confident that there has been sufficient scrutiny of that operator to ensure that they are protected. If this information were released it would undermine that confidence.
Looking at the nature of the request, the Commission considers that the relevant prejudice identified above would be likely to be caused to the Commission by disclosure and this weighs in the balance when considering the question of public interest.
We consider that the public interest is better served by withholding the documentation ensuring that consumers are protected through our processes rather than releasing information in isolation which in our view will not benefit the public as a whole.
Review of the decision
If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your Freedom of Information request you are entitled to an internal review of our decision. You should write to FOI Team, Gambling Commission, 4th floor, Victoria Square House, Victoria Square, Birmingham, B2 4BP or by reply to this email.
Please note, internal review requests should be made within 40 working days of the initial response. Requests made outside this timeframe will not be processed.
If you are not content with the outcome of our review, you may then apply directly to the Information Commissioner (ICO) for a decision. Generally, the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have already exhausted the review procedure provided by the Gambling Commission.
It should be noted that if you wish to raise a complaint with the ICO about the Commission’s handling of your request for information, then you are required to do so within six weeks of receiving your final response or last substantive contact with us.
The ICO can be contacted at: The Information Commissioner’s Office (opens in a new tab), Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.
Information Management Team
Gambling Commission
Internal Review Request
I would like to make an appeal. Your letter states that the Gambling Commission holds no correspondence between the Commission and Professor Wardle.
Professor Wardle is a key adviser to the Gambling Commission and, for example, appeared at its Better Evidence, Better Outcome conference this month. It seems inconceivable therefore that the Commission holds no correspondence with the professor.
Internal Review Response
I am writing to you further to your Freedom of Information request dated 08/02/2024 which we responded to on 13/03/2024, and your subsequent request for an internal review received on 15/03/2024.
Please accept our apologies for the delay in providing this response and for any inconvenience this has caused.
We have now concluded our review and our findings are detailed below.
This internal review was conducted by someone who was not involved in the processing of your original request.
In your initial email you requested the following information:
- All correspondence between the Gambling Commission and Gambling With Lives between 1st January 2022 and the present
- All correspondence between the Gambling Commission and Professor Heather Wardle of HW Research / the University of Glasgow between 1st January 2021 and the present
In our initial response, we were able to provide information in relation to part one of your request. However, some information in the scope of this part of your request was exempt from disclosure and the following exemptions were engaged:
- Section 40(2) - Personal Information
- Section 41 - Confidentiality
- Section 31 - Law Enforcement
Further to this, we advised that no information was held by the Gambling Commission falling within the scope of part two of your request.
In your request for an internal review of our initial response, you have expressed concern with the response to part two of your request. As such, we have focused our review on your request for ‘all correspondence between the Gambling Commission and Professor Heather Wardle of HW Research / the University of Glasgow between 1st January 2022 and the present?’
Internal Review
Following a review of your request and our response, I have established that our initial search did not identify the recorded information held by the Commission falling within the scope of this request.
Having conducted these searches again, I can now confirm that the Gambling Commission does hold information falling within the scope of this part of your request.
We will be sharing with you the information, that we can provide, falling within the scope of your request within the next 48 hours. Due to the volume of the material disclosable we are unable to send this information to you via email as the file is too large.
We are making arrangements to set up a file sharing link which will enable you to access and download this information. The requested information will be available to access for a period of one month from the date the link is sent.
You will receive an email invitation from the Gambling Commission that you will need to accept before you can access the information. Separately, you will receive an email with a link to the information provided.
We have redacted from all of the attached documents, information relating to identifiable individuals that would constitute personal data under Section 40(2) Personal Information.
The Data Protection Act 2018 requires personal data to be processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner in relation to the data subject. It is the view of the Commission that disclosing the personal information contained within the attached documents would constitute the disclosure of personal data and would contravene this principle.
This includes the email addresses, opinions and any other personal identifiable information.
This information is therefore exempt under section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
Additionally, some of the information contained within these emails, and some records in their entirety, are exempt under sections Section 22A (Research Information) and Section 43 (Commercial Interests) of the FOIA. The explanation of these exemptions is detailed below.
Section 22A - Research Information
As an evidence-based regulator we collaborate with local and international researchers and organisations to provide advice to the government about gambling behaviour in Great Britain.
We collect and analyse data to monitor changes that may have an impact on the regulatory framework and to make sure we are up-to-date with gambling industry statistics and gambling related research.
Some of the information within the scope of your request includes data that forms part of the Commissions ongoing programme of research designed to fill evidence gaps and inform policy and action.
This data will be published, alongside any supporting analysis. As such, we are of the view that this information is exempt under section 22A(1) (“Research Information”) of the FOIA.
Section 22A(1) (“Research Information”) provides that Information obtained in the course of, or derived from, a programme of research is exempt information if:
(a) the programme is continuing with a view to the publication, by a public authority or any other person, of a report of the research (whether or not including a statement of that information), and
(b) disclosure of the information under this Act before the date of publication would, or would be likely to, prejudice the programme,
i. the interests of any individual participating in the programme,
ii. the interests of the authority which holds the information, or
iii. the interests of the authority mentioned in paragraph (a) (if it is a different authority from that which holds the information).
Public interest test
This is a qualified exemption; therefore, the Commission must consider whether the public interest in maintaining the exemption is greater than the public interest in disclosing the requested information. These arguments are as follows:
Arguments in favour of disclosure:
- there is a legitimate public interest in promoting the accountability and transparency of public authorities.
- there is a public interest in Government Departments providing information they hold, that falls within the scope of an FOI request, as quickly as possible.
- disclosure of the raw data and the conversations about it allows for a wider evaluation of the conclusions that have been published.
Arguments in favour of maintaining the exemption:
- this needs to be balanced with the public interest in the Commission ensuring the maximum time/cost effectiveness.
- this research is ongoing and there is an intention to publish data, alongside any supporting analysis.
- as such, the Commission should be able to complete research before it is subjected to external scrutiny.
- premature publication of this data could lead to an incomplete and confusing picture emerging and would be likely to cause prejudice to the Commission’s (and other third parties) programme of research and statistics.
Weighing the balance
Whilst we recognise that there is a public interest in promoting the transparency and accountability of public authorities in a timely manner, there is no outstanding public interest in releasing this information whilst the programme is still ongoing.
Given that we will be publishing data in line with the Gambling Commission publication schedule, the necessary preparation and administration involved in publishing the information and the nature of the information in its raw state, we consider that our publication timetable is reasonable.
Having considered the above factors, the Commission is of the view that the balance of the public interest lies in maintaining the exemption.
Section 43 - Commercial interests
When the Gambling Commission takes regulatory action against a gambling operator, an outcome of that action can include a payment in lieu of the financial penalty the Commission might otherwise impose for breach of a licence condition. This is set in accordance with the Statement of Principles for Determining Financial Penalties. (opens in a new tab)
A regulatory settlement can include payment to an organisation for socially responsible purposes. The Commission reviews proposals for destinations of regulatory settlements.
Projects that have been approved since March 2019 are listed on our destinations of regulatory settlements to be applied for socially responsible purposes (opens in a new tab) page.
Some of the information within the scope of your request includes application-level details of specific requests for funding.
We consider that disclosing this level of detail of individual applications to be of a commercially sensitive nature. This level of detail is not otherwise in the public domain; therefore, we are of the view that this information is exempt under Section 43 Commercial Interests.
Section 43(2) of the FOIA provides that information is exempt information if its disclosure under the FOIA would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person (including the public authority holding it).
Public Interest Test
Having acknowledged that some of the information within the scope of your request is exempt from disclosure; Section 43 FOIA requires that we consider a public interest test to identify whether there is a wider public interest in fulfilling this request opposed to maintaining the exemption.
Arguments in favour of disclosure:
- It is recognised that there is a legitimate public interest in promoting the transparency of the Commission and in making information available to the public.
- Further to this, in understanding the execution of the social responsibility functions of the Gambling Commission and how the Commission is working towards protecting people from gambling-related harm.
Arguments in favour of maintaining the exemption:
- An extensive range of data is already available to the public in order to give a necessary level of understanding of the ‘safer gambling’ programme of work.
- The Commission publishes information regarding the reviews of proposals for destinations of regulatory settlements at least annually.
- Detail of individual companies does not contribute to the understanding of how we are working to reduce gambling harms. We consider that disclosing the information could discourage organisations from engaging with the Commission in future, which would be likely to prejudice the Commission’s ability in working towards protecting the wider public from gambling-related harm.
- Providing specific, identifying information could lead to comparisons being made between organisations, leading to unjustified inferences being made without the full context.
Weighing the balance
Whilst the Commission aims to be open and transparent, there is a need to preserve the confidentiality of information submitted on that basis and to be mindful of the commercial sensitivities of information that is held.
Having weighed these issues, the Commission is of the view that the public interest is best served through maintaining this exemption. There is very little that providing this information would do in terms of the public interest whilst disclosure would be likely to impact on the commercial interests of the organisations.
Right of appeal
If you are not content with the outcome of your review, you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner (ICO) for a decision. Generally, the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the complaints procedure provided by the Gambling Commission. The ICO can be contacted at: The Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.
Files
Some files may not be accessible for users of assistive technology. If you require a copy of the file in an accessible format contact us (opens in new tab) with details of what you require. It would help us to know what technology you use and the required format.
PDF Files Some PDF files cannot be displayed in a browser, you will see a message saying "Please wait...". If you see this message, you will need to download the file and open it in Adobe Acrobat Reader (opens in a new tab).