Racing fearful Burnham and new government may have gambling in sights

Seven prime ministers in the space of 10 years is a churn rate that even the British Horseracing Authority – which has had five full-time leaders in the same period, or six if you count the two-time “interim” chair, David Jones – cannot match. And as the search for Lord Charles Allen’s successor continues after his embarrassingly brief stint concluded in March, Jones will remain the sport’s figurehead in the crucial early weeks of Andy Burnham’s administration.

But what, if anything, might a new PM mean for Britain’s second-biggest spectator sport?

Burnham was born a mile-and-a-half away from Becher’s Brook, in the same hospital – Fazakerley – where dozens of jockeys have been treated after falls at Aintree over the years. But in terms of personal contact with Britain’s second-biggest spectator sport, he has been to the races just once – on the Friday of the Grand National meeting earlier this year. “I feel a bit ashamed,” he told an interviewer. “I was born [nearby] and this is my first ever time at the races. Fifty-six years on this earth, and I’ve made it here now.”

There are, almost certainly, enough pressing issues in Burnham’s in-tray to keep racing off his radar, and initially at least, the most significant decision from racing’s point of view will be the news that Lisa Nandy remains as culture secretary.

Nandy’s time in the role has covered the sport’s successful “Axe The Racing Tax” campaign against the harmonisation of online duty rates for betting and gaming products, during which she was an intermediary between racing and the Treasury. But she has also allowed the Gambling Commission to proceed with the introduction of affordability checks for gamblers – an idea inherited from the previous Conservative administration – in the face of warnings not just from the racing industry, but even former proponents of the policy, that it could cost the sport hundreds of millions of pounds in revenue.

If anyone in racing was clinging to the possibility that an incoming culture secretary might pause the process to allow for further consideration, that hope has now been extinguished. But now that Nandy’s position has been (re)confirmed, racing will hope that she takes a renewed interest in her brief, and perhaps takes a lead from the cross-party culture, media and sport committee by demanding much more transparency and accountability as the checks are rolled out than has been the case to date. If affordability checks in practice are not as “frictionless” as promised in theory, action will be needed sooner rather than later.

In the longer term, though, it is Burnham’s approach to the gambling industry that could prove to be more significant. In his role as Manchester’s mayor, the new prime minister was a co-signatory to a letter to Nandy last year which argued for local authorities to have more powers to prevent the spread of gambling premises. Burnham has also expressed support for the campaign group Against The Odds, which aims to “phase out gambling sponsorship across all levels and all types of sport”.

A ban on gambling sponsorship and promotion in sport that did not exempt horse racing would be potentially ruinous for the industry. In addition to tens of millions of pounds in direct sponsorship annually, the value of the sport’s terrestrial broadcasting rights – the basis of ITV’s free-to-air showcase for racing on around 100 days each year – would vanish overnight.

Even with an exemption for racing, however, a sponsorship ban would be a significant blow for betting, which has been increasingly marginalised by the growth of casino-style gaming and slots over many years. The debate over whether sponsorship is promoting gambling or – as the firms would argue – the individual company’s brand is more nuanced than many on both sides might care to admit.

But if it transpires that there is indeed a debate to be had, it is always likely to serve racing’s long-term interests best to put as much clear water as possible between betting on sport – which ranked 18th out of 22 gambling activities for association with high Problem Gambling Index Severity (PGSI) score in the latest Gambling Commission survey – and in-person and online casino, which ranked second and third respectively.

Of course, if the Burnham administration could find time over the next two or three years to address the many failings of the Blair government’s Gambling Act in 2005, that might be a significant positive for racing and punters alike. For now, though, a willingness to listen and act if the Gambling Commission’s affordability checks prove to be as toxic as racing fears would be a good place for the new administration to start.