– in the House of Lords at 11:41 am on 22 June 2006.
asked Her Majesty's Government:
What plans they have to combat any increase in gambling addictions caused by internet gambling.
My Lords, the Government recognise that internet gambling carries potential risks, which existing legislation cannot adequately address. The Gambling Act 2005 makes provision to regulate British-based internet gambling operators. The new regime will include specific licence conditions on social responsibility, including measures to minimise addiction.
Regulating remote gambling is a global challenge, so the Government have also called the first ever international summit on it. We will use that forum to explore the development of minimum international standards for remote gambling regulation.
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that Answer. Are we not in somewhat uncharted territory on knowing exactly the social damage done by addiction to gambling when set against today's opportunities and changing public attitudes? As he has implied, it is difficult to deal with internet gambling satisfactorily. Does he agree that as a first step it may be useful to look at the advertising of internet gambling, which in some way may throw light on the problems that we will face?
My Lords, I agree with the noble Viscount and his constructive suggestion. We could limit advertising on the London Underground, for instance, by internet companies based in Britain. We have other means of regulating companies based in Europe. If they are not based in Europe, we want to operate advertising restrictions, and we are looking at ways to implement them.
My Lords, quite rightly, we are concerned about the possibility of people becoming addicted to internet gambling, but will the Government assure us that they believe that the benefits that the internet generally provide far outweigh any problems from gambling? Can the Minister further assure us that we will not seek to regulate the internet to the point where we begin to lose the benefits of it?
My Lords, I do not think that it is practicable to regulate the internet, even if that were an aspiration. Of course, my noble friend is right: the internet provides the widest range of free information to which citizens have ever had access. But certain socially undesirable practices can be carried out on the internet, and certain forms of the promotion of gambling still require regulation where we are able to do so. That is why we are talking in international terms about limited, necessary regulation in a specific area.
My Lords, is not this largely the fault of the Government? In 2003, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport stated that it wished to see Britain become a world leader in online gambling, and in August last year the Minister wrote to me saying that that remained the Government's view. Is that not a totally irresponsible attitude to take, particularly on the morning when the Consumer Credit Counselling Service has reported that extreme debt is getting worse by the day? We are fighting against poverty and social disadvantage and trying to protect the vulnerable. Is it not time that the Government began to discourage rather than encourage online and other gambling?
My Lords, debt is a wide-ranging matter to which gambling contributes a small amount. Only a limited number of addicted gamblers get into difficulty. However, on the more general point, the issue is straightforward: if we are not prominent in encouraging online gambling in this country, it will be located elsewhere, making it more difficult for us effectively to regulate socially responsible gambling. It is not a question of us standing by and doing nothing because doing nothing would produce the worst of all worlds.
My Lords, I am president of GamCare, the charity that supports those who have problems with gambling. Does not the Minister agree that there has been a certain amount of misrepresentation of the alleged increase in problem gambling referred to in the Question? Some of that arises from an increase in the number of calls made to the GamCare helpline and demands for counselling. Is it not much more likely that the increase in the number of calls being received by GamCare arises from the fact that the charity is now much better known? It is advertised on every fruit machine in the country, and its services are more widely appreciated.
My Lords, I do not think that anyone can speak with greater authority on these issues than my noble friend, not only because of his presidency of GamCare, the most prominent institution concerned with the welfare of gamblers, but also in light of the fact that he was responsible for the Gambling Act and knows about the degree of regulation that we have been able to introduce in order to ensure that gambling is subject to social responsibility.
My Lords—
My Lords, we have had 30 minutes of Questions.