Nineteen MPs representing British racecourse constituencies have urged Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy to intervene before the Gambling Commission moves ahead with proposed financial risk assessments, commonly referred to as affordability checks.

The cross-party group raised concerns that the checks could damage British horseracing, reduce betting turnover and push customers toward unlicensed operators. The intervention comes before a Gambling Commission board meeting expected to consider whether the pilot scheme should move toward broader implementation.

Racing industry estimates cited in the letter put the potential cost to the sport at £250 million over the first five years. The Betting and Gaming Council has also warned that more than 44,000 horse racing bettors could shift to the illegal market if the checks proceed in their current form, creating a possible £13 million loss in Levy funding for British racing.

MPs Question Scrutiny of the Policy

The MPs said the policy has moved forward without enough parliamentary examination or transparency around the pilot scheme. Their letter also challenged whether the checks can remain frictionless for racing bettors if operators still need to ask some customers for financial documents.

“We do not believe there has been sufficient parliamentary scrutiny of this policy and neither has there been a sufficient level of transparency around the results of the Gambling Commission’s pilot of these checks,” the MPs said.

They added: “The pilot of affordability checks involving credit reference agencies has proved that the checks cannot be frictionless for racing bettors. The commission, however, seems intent on pursuing this damaging policy despite both the current and former gambling ministers promising that affordability checks would be introduced only if ‘fully frictionless’.”

The letter was signed by MPs from five political parties, including Dan Carden, Labour MP for Aintree; Jack Rankin, Conservative MP for Ascot; Helen Maguire, Liberal Democrat MP for Epsom Downs; and Nick Timothy, Conservative MP for Newmarket.

The checks stem from the 2023 Gambling White Paper and are being tested through a pilot process. Under that pilot, financial risk assessments have applied when customers record net deposits above £1,000 within 24 hours or £2,000 across a rolling 90-day period. A higher £5,000 monthly threshold was previously agreed during the initial phase of frictionless checks.

Illegal Market Concerns Increase

The MPs warned that tighter checks could send more bettors away from licensed operators. They argued that racing and betting remain closely connected, making any reduction in regulated betting activity a direct financial concern for the sport.

“Growing numbers of people are already choosing to bet illegally rather than be subjected to intrusive checks more appropriate for securing a mortgage than engaging in a legal pastime enjoyed by millions of Britons,” the MPs wrote.

Their letter referenced analysis by Yield Sec suggesting that one in 10 bettors already uses the illegal market. It also cited Treasury concerns and a £26 million allocation to the Gambling Commission to tackle illegal gambling, which the letter said grew by 522% between August 2021 and September 2023.

The Betting and Gaming Council has estimated that customer movement to illegal operators could cost the Treasury £300 million a year in lost revenue. A YouGov poll commissioned by the council found that two-thirds of respondents would refuse to provide financial documents if required to keep betting. The BGC has also estimated that 120,000 additional punters could face checks if the policy is implemented.

“Once that business has drifted from the licensed, tax-paying sector, evidence suggests it is very unlikely to return,” the MPs said. “Ultimately, this will result in a significant reduction in betting turnover on racing, with a potential loss to the sport of £250m in the first five years alone.”

Racing Bodies Call for a Pause

British racing figures have also pressed the government to reconsider the timing and handling of the policy. More than 400 figures from the sport previously signed a letter to Nandy outlining concerns over the financial impact on racing and the regulated betting market.

Dr James Noyes, an adviser to the government on gambling policy, resigned from his position this month and said plans to roll out the policy without proper scrutiny were “clearly unacceptable”.

As reported by Daily Express, Greg Swift, the British Horseracing Authority’s director of communications and corporate affairs, thanked the MPs for their support and warned about the effect on racing communities.

“We’re grateful for the tireless support of racecourse MPs who have recognised the existential threat to their constituencies posed by these checks. The damaging blow to racing’s finances will lead to job closures in their areas, as well as devastate a much-loved sport that is the beating heart of their communities.

“This is not the first intervention by racecourse MPs and their opposition to these checks is spread across several parties. Racing communities depend on a successful, thriving and financially viable sport and the government publicly recognised that in the last budget.

“The checks about to be implemented are in direct contradiction to the government’s public messages of support for racing and so we call on it to stop the checks and think again.”

Wilf Walsh, chairman of the Racecourse Association, also called for the pilot to be paused.

“The financial damage inflicted on British horseracing by affordability checks has already been felt, and this will be exacerbated if the pilot becomes policy. We again call on the government to intervene and pause the pilot programme to allow for a thorough and transparent evaluation of the evidence.”

The MPs asked Nandy to ensure ministerial oversight remains in place before any permanent action occurs.

“We believe that it is essential that the principle of ministerial oversight is upheld,” they said. “We therefore urge you to ask the Gambling Commission immediately to pause any further progression beyond the current pilot phase until a full and transparent assessment has been undertaken of its impacts on racing, consumers, the regulated betting market, and the public finances.”