Cookies on the Gambling Commission website

The Gambling Commission website uses cookies to make the site work better for you. Some of these cookies are essential to how the site functions and others are optional. Optional cookies help us remember your settings, measure your use of the site and personalise how we communicate with you. Any data collected is anonymised and we do not set optional cookies unless you consent.

Set cookie preferences

You've accepted all cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. About us
  3. Publication scheme

Industry Forum minutes for 21 March 2024

Minutes of the meeting of the Industry Forum, 21 March 2024.

Location: Victoria Square, Birmingham and on Microsoft Teams.

Members:

  • Nick Rust (Chair)
  • Tony Boulton
  • Kirsty Caldwell
  • Charles Cohen
  • Ashley Padgett
  • Mark Pearson
  • Nigel Roddis
  • Leo Walker
  • Helen Walton
  • David Williams.

In attendance:

  • Helen Child
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED (item 4 only)
  • REDACTED
  • Andrew Rhodes (item 1 only)
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED (item 4 only).

1. Item 1: Welcome and Introductions

The Industry Forum (IF) Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

The overall hopes for the Industry Forum were outlined, including that IF will provide wider colour and views, highlighting how different parts of the industry are affected by policy changes and the general operating environment. The experience should be constructive and collaborative, delivering practical solutions. It was confirmed that the Commission is fully committed to the success of IF.

Members agreed with these points and noted that they were recruited for their knowledge and experience within the industry, but they should not be seen as representative of every opinion amongst all operators.

It was confirmed that minutes of the IF meetings will be published on the GC website once approved by IF members at the following meeting.

2. Item 2: Agreement of Code of Conduct and ways of working

IF discussed and reviewed the draft IF Terms of Reference (ToR).

On item 3, third bullet point in the ToR, it was agreed that the wording would be changed from: (The Industry Forum will engage with the Board and Executive to:) ‘Give feedback to the Commission about its own performance as a regulator’, to: ‘Give feedback to the Commission on views and experience of dealing with it as a regulator’.

On item 4.1, the issue of the confidentiality of ongoing investigations was raised and the Head of Governance was asked to review the wording in the draft.

REDACTED

The IF will have access to GC subject matter experts as a plan of work is developed and IF members will also bring agenda items to meetings from the industry.

On ways of working and minuting of meetings, the IF will operate under the Chatham House Rule. IF also noted and agreed to operate under the IF Code of Conduct (CoC) for members and that the IF Chair will be the formal voice of the Industry Forum item 6.2. in the CoC). In addition, the IF agreed to use their judgement and experience on any wider dissemination of information discussed at meetings.

3. Item 3: Introduction to the Gambling Commission (GC) and current and/or upcoming issues

The IF received a presentation on an ‘overview of the Gambling Commission’, including the structure of the organisation.

Members asked questions and made comments on the naming of all of the Expert Groups and how those names are viewed in the wider community, there was a discussion about whether the naming of the Lived Experience Advisory Panel (LEAP) was clear enough to highlight their experience of harm, or whether it implied a more general experience of gambling.

There seems to be a void in the consumer voice space. However, the GC has commissioned Yonder, a research consultancy, to carry out research with thousands of consumers. It would also be very interesting to know how IF members gain consumer insight.

It would be interesting to know more on the additional GC activities in place to support licensees to meet their responsibilities.

On the GC’s data work, it is important that the GC is very clear on the questions they are asking of operators, so that operators can provide the right data. IF members offered to support this.

4. Item 4: Consultation process

The REDACTED and a REDACTED joined the meeting.

IF received an update on the Commission’s general approach to the consultation process.

IF members asked questions and made comments. There appears to be some disengagement from parts of the industry in responding to consultations.

In terms of how to make completing consultation responses more user friendly, it would be helpful for the GC to provide more clarity on how to complete the process more effectively and for the GC to communicate back to the industry in cases where there has not been a lot of change post consultations, and why.

At pre-engagement, input from startups, small and medium-sized operators should be sought, and consultation materials should indicate which questions apply to which sectors and/or operator groups.

5. Item 5: Forward look (topics for upcoming meetings)

The IF discussed the proposed plan for future meetings.

The IF would like to add another session on the evaluation of outcomes from consultations, as well as a future session on licensing. What practice IF members have in place to understand their consumers will also be added and, additionally, an item on the GC’s data work with operators.

The IF agreed that in person meetings would be preferable, bi-monthly, with a hybrid option via Teams available. However, there will be a meeting date set for April, if feasible.

6. Item 6: Any other business

The IF agreed that the meeting had been very productive and collaborative.

Is this page useful?
Back to top