Board Minutes for 23 January 2018
Meeting details
Venue:
Radisson Blu Edwardian Grafton Hotel,London,
W1T 5AY
Time:
09.00 – 15.30
Attendees:
- David Forrest (DF)
- Ian Gilmore (IG)
- Hermine Graham (HG)
- Richard Ives (RI)
- Chris Kelly (CK) (Chair)
- Rachel Lampard (RL)
- Simon Tanner (ST)
- Heather Wardle (HW)
In attendance:
- Helen Rhodes (HR)
- Tim Miller (TM)
(Staff names of those other than the Leadership team have been redacted)
Apologies:
- Russell Hoyle (RH)
- Marc Etches (ME)
Actions and status
Minutes and actions
Apologies and declarations of interest
CK welcomed Board members to the meeting and extended a special welcome to Tim Miller, Helen Rhodes and (REDACTED). Apologies were noted for Russell Hoyle. There were no declarations of interest.
Minutes and matters arising from 22 November 2017: RGSB 18 01 (01)
The minutes of the previous meeting were approved and there were no matters arising. All actions from the previous meeting were in progress or complete.
Introduction
CK set the scene for the meeting and reflected on the discussion over dinner the previous evening, noting in particular some of the comments Sarah Harrison had made on the Commission’s new corporate strategy. The key points were, the close alignment between the National Responsible Gambling Strategy and the Commission’s own strategy, (Redacted – information intended for future publication) and the intention to focus on a smaller number of areas which would include gambling-related harms.
The role of RGSB, future ways of working and 2018 work plan: RGSB 18 01 (02)
Following the launch of the Gambling Commission’s new corporate strategy an internal restructure is underway to create a new operating model which better aligns the work of the Commission under the five new strategic priorities. The purpose of the discussion with RGSB was to consider the role the Commission wants RGSB to play in light of its new strategy, and to consider what implications this will have for RGSB’s current and future ways of working.
(Redacted – information intended for future publication)
Action:
TM/HR to confirm the priority areas for future RGSB advice.
(REDACTED) to prepare an outline workplan for 2018.
(Redacted – information intended for future publication)
There was a brief discussion on the revised version of the RGSB Conflicts of Interests Policy which CK offered to send to the Commission for final sign-off once final amendments had been made.
Action:
CK to send an updated version of the RGSB Conflicts of Interest Policy to TM and HR for approval.
Discussion on the draft Gambling and Children and Young People paper
The purpose of this item was to allow the Board the opportunity to raise any final comments on the draft Gambling and Children and Young people paper. Overall the feedback on the revised paper was very positive and there were only marginal changes suggested to the wording of principles 5 and 7. It was agreed that CK and (REDACTED) would make the final amendments to the paper, including considering whether a short executive summary would be a helpful addition. (REDACTED) and TM would also prepare a joint communications strategy to support the publication of the report, which would include agreed lines to take for any media enquiries.
Action:
CK and (REDACTED) to make the final amendments to the paper, and send to the Gambling Commission. Gambling Commission to prepare a formal response with a view to publishing both documents before Easter.
On the issue of what more could be done to protect children and young people from gambling advertising, it was felt that RGSB should proactively approach CAP and BCAP and arrange a workshop to discuss the issues to inform the development of their forthcoming guidance.
Action:
(REDACTED) to approach CAP and BCAP to arrange a workshop to discuss the contents of their planned guidance on advertising and children and young people.
Gambling-related harms: RGSB 18 01 (03)
HW used this item to bring the Board up to speed with the progress the expert group on gambling-related harms had made with: developing a definition, modelling the concepts involved, and considering how indicators could be identified to allow it to be measured and monitored. This is a significant piece of work which is critical to the delivery of priority action one.
On the definition, the Board felt that while it was appropriate for adults, it did not necessarily translate well to children and young people. There was also a suggestion that the definition did not currently take into account those who have pre-existing issues or vulnerabilities for whom there would be more severe impacts.
Board thought the socio-economic model of risk and protective factors for gambling-related harms was useful but noted the difference in language between the use of environment in the model and society in the definition and suggested the need for consistency. Although the expert group has so far focused on the harms associated with gambling, it was recommended that consideration of any benefits that arise from gambling should also be included.
In terms of next steps the Board’s feedback will be combined with that from the expert group and used to update the definition and models. A workshop would be held on 29 January with members of the secretariat, Gambling Commission and GambleAware to generate a long-list of potential indicators and assess their priority for inclusion. The expert group will meet again in early March with a view to publishing their definition and framework by the end of March.
Action:
HW to take forward the actions set out above.
Strategy progress, research priorities and quantum of funding: RGSB 18 01 (04)
CK introduced the item which was in three parts: to discuss progress with delivering the second year of the National Responsible Gambling Strategy and inform the production of the next annual progress report; to consider the need for any changes to existing research priorities; and to review the Gambling Commission’s estimate of funding required to deliver the Strategy.
(Redacted – information intended for future publication)
Action:
(REDACTED) to circulate the combined note of the Board’s responses to the ‘homework’ questions and ensure that the Board’s comments are fed into the draft progress report.
After a brief discussion on research priorities, RGSB agreed that the current plan and timetable remained appropriate.
(Redacted – information intended for future publication)
Concluding remarks
CK invited RI and HG to offer their reflections on the day and thanked members for their engagement throughout the meeting and contribution to the discussions.
Any other business
There were no additional items for discussion.
RGSB Secretariat – update report: RGSB 18 01 (05)
This paper was provided for information only and was not discussed.