Labour said only a few years ago that the deregulation caused a slew of problems.
Imaginary wokism, wow if only it were imaginary. It’s a creeping disease of appeasement to those who always feel disaffected in one form or another.
Give them one thing and they take it as vindication to dream up ever more ludicrous demands.

One by one European countries have closed down gambling and opened up to the multicoloured flag wavers desires.
ID is a reality in those countries, the UK government was the first to stop it.
What did Starmer say? Flapped around a bit and said 16 might be too young when pressed.
The guy will say anything to anyone

My first experience of being unable to deposit happened 2 years ago:  I tried to deposit £200 (mid-afternoon) on an exchange and the transaction was blocked by my building society (the biggest in Britain).  I rang up my building society and they couldn't find any restrictions on my account, but before they allowed me to deposit, they went through my bank statement and made comments on it and were suspicious that I hardly used the current account much etc.  Then they noticed that I had transferred £1500 out of savings into the current account during the last month and asked me what I was going to spend it on...etc.
So this intrusiveness is already widespread beyond companies involved in betting and is spreading through society.  Cracking down on the people who use online gambling is just a gateway into widespread surveillance and control.

Had to correct my spelling, if anyone had trouble reading my above post

Two sides of the same coin Dave

As somebody correctly mentioned earlier in the thread, fiscal policy is the tool used to encourage or discourage the activity of the population of that area.
Unless they implemented something that encouraged a domestic alternative that I’m unaware of the end result is a shutting down of betting facility. And they can’t pretend they didn’t know as other countries have done it before them.

I think a case of law should be taken.Surely everyone has the right to spend their money any way they wish.
its called your civil liberties.

Individual can set up a limited company with little capital, run up large debts, take out plenty of money and then liquidate owing plenty and find a way to restart the process. Not very balanced imo.

What too many seem to be forgetting is that the White Paper did not originate because of betting on horseracing,it's origin stems from online casino and in shop FOBTs which did indeed create problem gambling issues.The lowering of stakes on FOBTs was overdue and the target then should have focussed on online casino type products with mandatory limits imposed.

I would guess the vast majority of gambling issues are/were related to those products.Racing e.g BHA et al should have tackled the blanket approach by emphasising the comparative difference to exclude betting on horseracing being included.

30 + years ago I wrote in the Racing Post about the FOBT/Fruit machines in betting shops being a backward step for short term gain and emphasised the limited resources a punter had whilst in shop.The legalising of fruit machines being just a mechanical method of emptying whatever little punters had left in their pockets.

This was just a forerunner of what subsequently happened with the online revolution where bookies realised they could make more outside of horseracing.The banning of credit cards was a positive move but today the emphasis should be on restricting the casino type products,even banning them completely,unlkely tbh but the only hope for racing is to somehow distance itself as a completely separate product and try to force bookmakers back to where they originated even allowing for sports betting online reducing the percentage racing once comprised their turnover.

In short and probably too late racing should have done more to emphasise the difference in its product?

wrong. the quality of sherbet is far removed from tesgo cava. its very good. ive been on a few and they are uniformly excellent, ascot and chester in particular

you're only getting the Moet & Chandon Bicentenary Cuvée Dry Imperial 1943 if your profit / loss is fkng atrocious.  or has the propensity to be so.

they've actually made it easy by corralling everyone that should be subject to an 'affordability check' into one fooking tent

mitolo,
I was invited to one of those by bet**q at Chester about 10 years ago.  I passed, mainly because I thought that I would be stuck in a box with yuppies from the company, and I didn't have the time anyhow.  But it sounds like you had a good time.  I'd just like to know what I missed:  What were the other people like?  Did you get smoked salmon at Chester?  Do the boxes at Chester have their own toilets?

Maybe he doesn't want his expenses or outside interests examined.   

Shyt - I didn't know there was another one!

Andrew Black from Betfair about to talk on this on the " opening Show "  itv4.

Andrew Black on the Gambling Commission..... all powerful and unaccountable.

Came across very well there, was correct all on fronts.

And do you think they will bow…..they will look upon him as an ex….and frown

Punters can play the flashing lights and bingo on any gambling site

They see a gambler a gambler regardless what they play on….

The end is nigh….

Yeah and like the old poker players used to say play where you know you'll get your dosh when you win.

Harry, the spokesman for the t.o.t.e.