GambleAware hits back at APPG criticism
CEO Mark Etches says he still does not understand the APPG’s concerns due to a lack of detail
GambleAware has highlighted its disappointment in a rebuttal to the Gambling-Related Harm APPG after the political group criticised the operation of the safer gambling charity.
In a four-page letter of response to the APPG, GambleAware CEO Marc Etches said that while the charity welcomes much of the APPG’s recommendations for preventing online harm, he was unhappy with comments made by the group surrounding the way the charity operates.
“Despite the oral and written evidence provided to the Group last year, it is not entirely clear what is driving these concerns, beyond a general question around GambleAware’s independence and effectiveness,” Etches said.
In its November 2019 interim report produced as part of the inquiry into online gambling harm, the APPG cited concerns about the way treatment services for gambling addiction are commissioned in the UK.
“GambleAware collects funds from the industry to research and treat gambling addiction, but we are deeply concerned about the way they operate and an urgent review of their role and effectiveness is required,” the report stated.
The APPG asserted that commissioning of research should be transferred from GambleAware and the UKGC to independent UK research councils, in line with other major public health issues.
The APPG also called for “continuity and security” in the funding of gambling-related harm treatment services across the UK through the application of a statutory levy on gambling operators.
At the time the APPG issued a request for responses from individuals, stakeholders and other parties to its findings.
Etches claimed that despite robust governance arrangements and reassurances that the UK gambling industry does not influence GambleAware’s commissioning policy, a small number of academics, researchers and other stakeholders have refused funding from the charity.
“Under the existing system, there is nothing more that GambleAware can do to refute this perception, other than to continue to reiterate and reinforce the messages of independence of our commissioning activities and to try to engage with these academics and researchers in other ways,” Etches added.