Right to reply: Clive Hawkswood, Remote Gambling Association

Clive Hawkswood, chief executive of the Remote Gambling Association, says the claims by some in the UK press that British sport faces an increased threat of match-fixing because of the move offshore by major UK-licensed betting operators are bizarre and must be challenged.

The moves offshore by William Hill and Ladbrokes are commercial decisions.

Firstly, online betting is a global operation facing global challenges and is not (nor ever was) solely focused on British sport.

Secondly, and following on from this, it is a fallacy to suggest that betting operators combat integrity threats because they are compelled to. They do it because it is crucial to the safe running of their business.

Thirdly, the Gambling Commission does not have a monopoly on good regulation.

Reputable betting operators have been making a significant investment in integrity mechanisms to assist sports for some considerable time, and will continue to do so. Operators have a significant interest in this area; what harms sport likewise harms operators, both in financial and reputation terms. There is, therefore, a mutual interest, and the fact that operators are based abroad makes no difference in that respect.

As with those who wildly, and inaccurately, speculate that betting presents as great a risk to sport as doping, the comments in the press have no foundation and do nothing to focus the discussion about what is an essentially commercially forced move.

The RGA is presently conducting a consultation on sports betting, and has invited a number of national and international sporting bodies to respond ““ we await these with interest.

This article first appeared in the September issue of eGaming Review.

Don’t miss out on egaming news: sign up for our free, daily Snapshot email. Or get the news as its breaks with the free eGaming Review RSS feed.