Labour MP Expresses Worries Over UKGC Affordability Checks Proposal

The affordability checks presented by the United Kingdom Gambling Commission (UKGC) are causing growing concern, and now politicians have waded into the debate. Labour MP for Doncaster Central, Sally Jameson, has expressed her underlying reservations, insisting that checks need to be “targeted, proportionate and based on solid evidence”.

Originally proposed as part of the government’s White Paper in 2023, light-touch vulnerability checks were triggered when a player spent £500 in a month during a trial which began in August 2024, but by February 2025, this monthly figure reduced to £150. Racing bodies, such as the BHA, have called for a pause on the rollout of the checks, and Jameson is under no illusions about the risks involved.

What does the data show?

In the most recent data revealed earlier this month, a YouGov poll indicated that nearly two-thirds of bettors (65%) would be unwilling to share financial documents with betting operators. Generally speaking, the regulated betting industry continues to thrive in an ever-evolving climate.

Indeed, the Betting and Gaming Council (BGC) have routinely referred to how the business supports over 109,000 jobs, contributes £6.8 billion to the UK economy, and raises £4 billion in tax each year. When this is extended to land-based wagering, betting shops support 42,000 jobs in the UK, contributing £140 million a year to horse racing.

Ironing out existing issues

Jameson’s consternation over the affordability checks matter comes in a year when her constituency will be hosting the 250th edition of the iconic St Leger race, representing a significant milestone in horse racing history. And she thinks there are a few fundamental flaws that need to be addressed before the UKGC can move on to the next stage with their policy proposal.

She said:

“Operators have reported inconsistencies in the data returned by credit reference agencies, meaning more customers may face account restrictions or requests for further information. Before this is implemented across the board, we must iron out any issues so that we have a system that works as it was intended to.

“Someone having a bet on the St Leger should not feel they are being treated as a financial risk for taking part in a legal activity that more than 22.5 million adults enjoy per month.

“People might not bet regularly all year round but may choose to place a few more bets during major events like Cheltenham, Aintree, Royal Ascot or St Leger itself. That kind of pattern should not automatically trigger intrusive itself.”

Far from a done deal

Although the UKGC was encouraged by its findings from the pilot, suggesting the affordability checks would be 97% frictionless, far better than original government estimates published in the White Paper, there is still work to be done to get a deal over the line.

Jameson inferred the growing influence of the black market; however, she insists that further scrutiny of the pilot needs to be carried out before the UKGC can implement its policy.

She added:

“No one is arguing against protecting vulnerable people. That must always be part of the system and continually supported and improved. But those protections must be targeted, proportionate and based on solid evidence.

“Before any further steps are taken, the Government must ensure the Gambling Commission properly evaluates the pilot. If the data is inconsistent and customers may still face disruption or intrusive checks, then the case for moving forward has simply not been made and there is more work to be done.”