International Agreements Committee
Tuesday 14th July 2026
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
(began 2 weeks ago)
Watch LiveSkip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
14:09
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Great. Well, good afternoon, everyone, and thank you very much for coming back again to discuss the McAllen convention. I'm extremely pleased to be, um, to be able to welcome three important contributors to our evidence. John Pierce, the director of enforcement and intelligence at the Gambling Commission, thank you very much for being with us in the room. And Karen Morehouse, who is CEO of the International Tennis Integrity Agency and joining online is Nigel Moore, co-chair, Sports Betting Integrity Forum. Thank you very much for joining us today.
We've had some very interesting evidence sessions, including particularly interesting one, I thought last week from Moses, who gave us a really very sort of slightly moving account of his own life. And you could see how easy it is for people to be corrupted in that way. And you might want to comment on some of the evidence that we've heard. Um, but with so much sport going on at the moment, we just finish Wimbledon, we've got the World Cup tomorrow. So both of you have probably been pretty busy.
Uh, we're very keen to hear from you specifically relating to the treaty. So our job is to scrutinise treaties and agreements and to make comment on the detail within the recommendations to Parliament. So in light of that, if you could frame your answers relating to this specifically, rather than necessarily just simply the issue of match fixing, which clearly we're very keen to, to control.
We've had some very interesting evidence sessions, including particularly interesting one, I thought last week from Moses, who gave us a really very sort of slightly moving account of his own life. And you could see how easy it is for people to be corrupted in that way. And you might want to comment on some of the evidence that we've heard. Um, but with so much sport going on at the moment, we just finish Wimbledon, we've got the World Cup tomorrow. So both of you have probably been pretty busy.
Uh, we're very keen to hear from you specifically relating to the treaty. So our job is to scrutinise treaties and agreements and to make comment on the detail within the recommendations to Parliament. So in light of that, if you could frame your answers relating to this specifically, rather than necessarily just simply the issue of match fixing, which clearly we're very keen to, to control.
14:10
14:11
14:11
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Thank you, Lord chair. Uh, so my question is to all three, please. But perhaps starting with Nigel, um, from your. Your professional experiences, do you think the problem of manipulating UK sports competitions is getting worse?Or perhaps is changing in nature?Are you. Are there any particular sporting actors, betting services or contacts which are more at risk?Right.
14:12
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Yes. Um, it's hard to judge in terms of um, is the problem getting worse?Because, uh, as we get more regulated jurisdictions, um, reporting is increasing. So it does show an increase in cases and alerts, but I'm not convinced that that's necessarily an overall increase in the problem in terms of the changing in nature. Um, I have seen an increase in match fixing at lower levels of sport. Um, and I believe this is actually originates from Covid because during Covid time, betting operators were looking for markets to offer and they offered markets on lower level events.
Um, and this included the full markets, including handicap markets. So this has continued to the present day. And it's an attraction to low income players to fix aspects of matches that they're playing in. Because if they fix certain aspects, they can still win the match. So you can get money from betting and you can also win prize money. Um, and often this involves friends and family or business associates of the player doing the betting. So you know, that's an interesting aspect for me or an interesting development.
So that's not transnational, that's not organised crime as such. It's at a much lower level, but it's still um, is quite impactive. Um, and I do think that when um handicap markets are offered on a sport that does make the sport more vulnerable to fixing, um, because there is a possibility, um, of making more money because especially in, uh, in single player sports, um, because where you have two players, the betting operators are very good at setting the odds. So if you then change it.
So it's certain aspects of that match, like who's going to win the next, uh, aspect of the match?Or you know, who's going to win the next service game or things like that. Then those are things you can bet on and you can get increased odds. Um, now it's an interesting aspect though, because they're illiquid markets. So it means that there is not, um, a tremendous amount of money in those markets. So if you have a fixed what tends to happen, a lot of money goes in.
And then that does create an alert, which then leads to to investigation and the full process coming in. Um, I think football and tennis remain the top sports, um, where that are having problems. And I think this is simply because there are so many events that are being offered, um, as opposed to it being that there's any particular problem with those sports. I think a wider number of sports are having um, bedding products offered on their events. And I think one of the big problems is that we're heavily reliant on sports governing bodies to deliver, um, investigations and um, processes to manage this particular problem, because I think it is generally accepted that criminal prosecutions in this area are very rare in the UK.
Um, which is something that obviously we need to, uh, we need to look at going forward, but, but a lot of small sports will not have the resources to deal with these type of issues if they strike. Um, and so the sports betting integrity Forum, sports betting intelligence unit do provide advice and guidance to smaller sports. And we do try to help them frame their rules and processes. Um, but it's a fact of life that when you're in a civil process or an arbitration process, it is expensive to run.
Um, and so that's, you know, a key area for these sports. Um, but I'll pause there and let my, let Karen and.
Um, and this included the full markets, including handicap markets. So this has continued to the present day. And it's an attraction to low income players to fix aspects of matches that they're playing in. Because if they fix certain aspects, they can still win the match. So you can get money from betting and you can also win prize money. Um, and often this involves friends and family or business associates of the player doing the betting. So you know, that's an interesting aspect for me or an interesting development.
So that's not transnational, that's not organised crime as such. It's at a much lower level, but it's still um, is quite impactive. Um, and I do think that when um handicap markets are offered on a sport that does make the sport more vulnerable to fixing, um, because there is a possibility, um, of making more money because especially in, uh, in single player sports, um, because where you have two players, the betting operators are very good at setting the odds. So if you then change it.
So it's certain aspects of that match, like who's going to win the next, uh, aspect of the match?Or you know, who's going to win the next service game or things like that. Then those are things you can bet on and you can get increased odds. Um, now it's an interesting aspect though, because they're illiquid markets. So it means that there is not, um, a tremendous amount of money in those markets. So if you have a fixed what tends to happen, a lot of money goes in.
And then that does create an alert, which then leads to to investigation and the full process coming in. Um, I think football and tennis remain the top sports, um, where that are having problems. And I think this is simply because there are so many events that are being offered, um, as opposed to it being that there's any particular problem with those sports. I think a wider number of sports are having um, bedding products offered on their events. And I think one of the big problems is that we're heavily reliant on sports governing bodies to deliver, um, investigations and um, processes to manage this particular problem, because I think it is generally accepted that criminal prosecutions in this area are very rare in the UK.
Um, which is something that obviously we need to, uh, we need to look at going forward, but, but a lot of small sports will not have the resources to deal with these type of issues if they strike. Um, and so the sports betting integrity Forum, sports betting intelligence unit do provide advice and guidance to smaller sports. And we do try to help them frame their rules and processes. Um, but it's a fact of life that when you're in a civil process or an arbitration process, it is expensive to run.
Um, and so that's, you know, a key area for these sports. Um, but I'll pause there and let my, let Karen and.
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:16
14:16
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Yes. So, um um it's in relation to um response from operators. It's actually within our um uh our. Our. Within the sort of, um, our sort of terms of reference for, for operators, they have to have to obviously comply. Um, you know, with our requirements. So in terms of the response that we do get from industry, it is inevitably, um, positive. Uh, we do get reports coming through on, you know, where there are potential concerns around specific events or potential match fixing.
Were there any sorts of concerns of that nature?We do get those reports through from industry and certainly from my experience over the last few years at the Gambling Commission, um, that's working well in terms of that transfer of information from, uh, from industry into the gambling commission, sports betting intelligence team.
Were there any sorts of concerns of that nature?We do get those reports through from industry and certainly from my experience over the last few years at the Gambling Commission, um, that's working well in terms of that transfer of information from, uh, from industry into the gambling commission, sports betting intelligence team.
14:31
14:31
14:31
14:31
14:32
14:32
14:32
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
Thank you. And what we've heard from you so far is a clear. Understanding of working with what is a framework. And Nigel, you mentioned this as a framework convention. That can be helpful, but there can also be glitches or omissions. So my question really is, um, what are the conventions strengths?Do you think from your point of view as an individual, uh, people who. If your own organizations, um, and are there any avenues that you can think of that the, uh, the, those who are working with the convention can go down to make the whole thing actually stronger and work.
And I wonder, may I start, please, with John Pierce?And I do have a small, if I may share a supplementary afterwards relating to the work that you have done. And thank you for the written, uh, submission you put in advance the work that you did, uh, more broadly internationally about good behaviour.
And I wonder, may I start, please, with John Pierce?And I do have a small, if I may share a supplementary afterwards relating to the work that you have done. And thank you for the written, uh, submission you put in advance the work that you did, uh, more broadly internationally about good behaviour.
14:33
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Well, thank you very much. Um, so in terms of areas where, where there are clear strengths from our perspective, um, it basically the group of Copenhagen, um, is to strengthen the governance and operational capacity of national platforms. So if you look at the model that's been built out in the GB and then replicated internationally, um, for me that's a real strength. There's a kind of um, a network there. We're able to share intelligence, we're able to, um, showcase examples of cases etc.
that various teams have been involved in. For me, that's a real strength because there's, there will be inevitably a, you know, the way that cases might be investigated or taken forward will be different on an international basis. Um, so anything that we can do to kind of showcase when we're actually able to take a case forward, I think, I think is really important. And that network obviously gives us that opportunity to do that. Um, the other key thing with this as well is speed.
So if you're not able to react quickly, quickly, then obviously there's real potential there for, um, some of these issues to spread as well. So again, kind of improving that intelligence around the types of sports, for example, that are being targeted or the level of sports as well. And I'm sure Karen will talk about that. You know, with tennis, for example, that, you know, there's real issues at certain levels there where there's, you know, match fixing is likely to be more prevalent. So opportunity to share what's going on on an international basis is a real positive for me.
Um, in terms of what could be improved. There's a real difference, I think, in terms of taking this from intelligence to action. And I think that's an area that I think internationally, we really need to try and focus on and build, um, the work that we're doing in the gambling commission and taking, you know, some quite significant cases forward will hopefully help in terms of showcasing to all the teams internationally what is possible. But I think that's an area that when you move from intelligence to actual enforcement activity, for me, that's an area where we can really develop post, um, ratification to really try and strengthen that international approach and be more coordinated than we're able to at the moment.
that various teams have been involved in. For me, that's a real strength because there's, there will be inevitably a, you know, the way that cases might be investigated or taken forward will be different on an international basis. Um, so anything that we can do to kind of showcase when we're actually able to take a case forward, I think, I think is really important. And that network obviously gives us that opportunity to do that. Um, the other key thing with this as well is speed.
So if you're not able to react quickly, quickly, then obviously there's real potential there for, um, some of these issues to spread as well. So again, kind of improving that intelligence around the types of sports, for example, that are being targeted or the level of sports as well. And I'm sure Karen will talk about that. You know, with tennis, for example, that, you know, there's real issues at certain levels there where there's, you know, match fixing is likely to be more prevalent. So opportunity to share what's going on on an international basis is a real positive for me.
Um, in terms of what could be improved. There's a real difference, I think, in terms of taking this from intelligence to action. And I think that's an area that I think internationally, we really need to try and focus on and build, um, the work that we're doing in the gambling commission and taking, you know, some quite significant cases forward will hopefully help in terms of showcasing to all the teams internationally what is possible. But I think that's an area that when you move from intelligence to actual enforcement activity, for me, that's an area where we can really develop post, um, ratification to really try and strengthen that international approach and be more coordinated than we're able to at the moment.
14:35
14:35
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Um, so from our perspective, one of our limitations is we can only take action and our rules against people who are bound by our rules. So be that players, officials or coaches. Um, and it's very rare that they are the ultimate corruptor. It's very rare that that's the person who's actually placing the bets and making the money at that level. Um, so the real strength for us is that recognition that this is a really a shared responsibility and that to get to the right outcome needs everyone to utilize their powers against the people that they have jurisdiction over, because otherwise we can keep taking action against, um, athletes, players.
Oftentimes they're in effect victims themselves because they have been corrupted by someone who's preyed on their vulnerability to get them to corrupt something in a sports event. Um, you know, once they're identified and removed from the sport, the corruptor will just move on to the next player. So we need to work together to make sure we're actually dealing with the root cause, rather than just someone within that chain. Um, in terms of improvements or areas. Watch out areas. Um, John referred to it in relation to speed.
It's important for us that this framework is, is set up and delivered in a way that means that things can move at pace. Um, when we work with law enforcement because they have, um, their target is different to ours. Um, we have to find a way of working together in a way that means that we both achieve the outcome we want. Um, that means then taking action under there, um, the criminal rules against the ultimate corruptors and means that we can also in a timely way, take action against the participants and remove them from the sport.
Um, and then it's really important that it continues to evolve. Um, one thing I think we've all learned over the last few years is that the betting markets and how things work will change. So we just need to ensure that the framework is flexible enough to deal with what we discover in two, five, ten years time.
Oftentimes they're in effect victims themselves because they have been corrupted by someone who's preyed on their vulnerability to get them to corrupt something in a sports event. Um, you know, once they're identified and removed from the sport, the corruptor will just move on to the next player. So we need to work together to make sure we're actually dealing with the root cause, rather than just someone within that chain. Um, in terms of improvements or areas. Watch out areas. Um, John referred to it in relation to speed.
It's important for us that this framework is, is set up and delivered in a way that means that things can move at pace. Um, when we work with law enforcement because they have, um, their target is different to ours. Um, we have to find a way of working together in a way that means that we both achieve the outcome we want. Um, that means then taking action under there, um, the criminal rules against the ultimate corruptors and means that we can also in a timely way, take action against the participants and remove them from the sport.
Um, and then it's really important that it continues to evolve. Um, one thing I think we've all learned over the last few years is that the betting markets and how things work will change. So we just need to ensure that the framework is flexible enough to deal with what we discover in two, five, ten years time.
14:37
14:37
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
I think it's a step in the right direction in that we are joined up. Um with the countries that have ratified, which will help that exchange of information. It will help that cooperation, um, with the countries that are party to the agreement. And I think if we sit outside that there is a risk, of course that, um, we don't get that benefit now we have for, um, some years since, uh, 2018, I think been working as if we have ratified the convention, um, in that the sports betting, uh, intelligence unit and the Sports Betting Integrity Forum have been working, um, along the lines of, and taking the approach of MacLean.
So from that you can tell that, you know, broadly, we have a lot of support for this. Um, but I do take the point that as with any, um, step forward, we could, we could, we could go further.
So from that you can tell that, you know, broadly, we have a lot of support for this. Um, but I do take the point that as with any, um, step forward, we could, we could, we could go further.
14:38
14:38
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
David, can I just go back as I said I would to the original. Thank you very much. Because it is a specific issue with regard to the work of the Gambling Commission. And I noticed that the work that you have done is to try to ensure that government, governments overseas can actually try to build resilience within their own systems to be able to deliver, um, a more honest way of dealing with those who are trying to destroy basically the whole system by using their illegal betting and their systems.
So I'm trying to be very diplomatic. There's one particular issue over Malta that arose, um, which means that Malta, which I know that the Gambling Commission did assist to have really proper systems in place. Malta has now said that they're concerned that in doing that, um that their current licensees would find themselves out in the wild and so they, they won't be ratifying. And it also means the EU subsequently is not ratifying. Of course, what we're looking at is the UK's ratification.
So thank you for what you've done so far. Are you able to do more to give some resilience to Malta, to ensure that they can actually get into the fold?
So I'm trying to be very diplomatic. There's one particular issue over Malta that arose, um, which means that Malta, which I know that the Gambling Commission did assist to have really proper systems in place. Malta has now said that they're concerned that in doing that, um that their current licensees would find themselves out in the wild and so they, they won't be ratifying. And it also means the EU subsequently is not ratifying. Of course, what we're looking at is the UK's ratification.
So thank you for what you've done so far. Are you able to do more to give some resilience to Malta, to ensure that they can actually get into the fold?
14:39
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Yeah. I mean, the Gambling Commission does support, um other regulators internationally. So um again, very happy if Malta wants to reach out to discuss, you know, the existing setup and framework or the approach that we've got, um, within GB, um, that's an offer that's available to them. Very, very happy to support them. Um, you know, as needed in that space to.
14:39
14:40
14:40
14:40
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
So in relation to the cases that have been taken forward so far by the Gambling Commission, there tends to be a UK element to the offending, which tends to be suspects that are based in, in GB. Um and that's been the big focus of the uh the existing cases that the team are looking at at the moment. It's absolutely an area of growth, we think for the gambling commission, as I'm sure everyone's aware of the additional funding that's um come across to the commission, additional £26 million.
That part of that funding we want to use to strengthen our investigation approach and our, um, you know, prosecutorial approach as well in future that could lead to potentially more cases coming through the system. But we really want to make sure that we're at the forefront, um, as an organisation in able to tackle some of these issues. And once you start to get to the sort of cross border type type issues, I think that's an area that we would want to develop and really try and take forward as well.
Post-stratification to see where we can take that.
That part of that funding we want to use to strengthen our investigation approach and our, um, you know, prosecutorial approach as well in future that could lead to potentially more cases coming through the system. But we really want to make sure that we're at the forefront, um, as an organisation in able to tackle some of these issues. And once you start to get to the sort of cross border type type issues, I think that's an area that we would want to develop and really try and take forward as well.
Post-stratification to see where we can take that.
14:40
14:40
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I'm sorry, I has a question. I know hovering, but um. With these new prediction markets as opposed to going to a betting shop, Ladbrokes or Betfair, whatever it is, where I assume there's a high degree of transparency. Isn't that isn't it starting to become almost impossible to track who is making an illegal bet?
14:41
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
There are a number of difficulties. You've obviously got the mentioned the traditional betting market. Even within a traditional betting market, if somebody went into a bookmakers and paid cash, that would be difficult to trace. It's not impossible. We've had cases where we've had information that suspicious bets have been been taking place on a betting premises, and we've been able to secure CCTV and take cases forward of that nature. Um, so not impossible in on the remote space. There's a requirements obviously registered for an account.
We get an awful lot of information about an individual. There are some difficulties around that. If it it's unlikely that somebody would perhaps place the bets themselves. It could be a family member or somebody that they know, but ah, you know, a big element of the work that the sports betting intelligence team do will be to try and identify, identify and analyze those links, um, where we've got concerns over a specific betting market, um, in relation to some of the emerging markets and particularly the illegal markets, that's where there's a real danger because as soon as you step outside of the regulated space.
We get an awful lot of information about an individual. There are some difficulties around that. If it it's unlikely that somebody would perhaps place the bets themselves. It could be a family member or somebody that they know, but ah, you know, a big element of the work that the sports betting intelligence team do will be to try and identify, identify and analyze those links, um, where we've got concerns over a specific betting market, um, in relation to some of the emerging markets and particularly the illegal markets, that's where there's a real danger because as soon as you step outside of the regulated space.
14:42
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
We won't, for example, um, you know, our first line of defense is a regulated operator. So they'll provide data to us when these spots, um, issues relating to an event. Um, there's potential that we wouldn't see that data and we'd be relying on the sports, um, sports bodies to identify whether some of those issues are and where they're taking place. So I think the work that we're doing to try and disrupt the illegal market space is really important, not just for the benefits of trying to, you know, really damp down that marketplace, but also because of the impact it would have on the actual, you know, sports betting in, in, in GB.
14:43
14:43
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Question on the impact of the convention, which was concluded in 2014, came into effect in 2019. Is it too early yet to assess the impact?Is it relevant that many countries have signed but not yet ratified, although some, as Nigel has said, may not have ratified, but they implement the convention. So what has been the impact so far?
14:43
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
So from a GB perspective, um, I think Nigel covered it very well. We've worked on the basis that we need to get a lot of the implement, a lot of the aspects of the convention now. And that's been in place for a significant period of time. And that's work that's developed, you know, over a number of years. So for me, in terms of the sort of benefits that obviously the clear channels of communication that we've got set up with other national platforms, I think that's really important.
Um, this improved sharing of information, but a lot of ground has been covered. Um, and really ratification is all about moving it from a, um, a position where we're doing things predominantly through consent and by speaking to other countries and, um, trying to support each other with the work. This is actually formalizing that. And in my view is the next step that we need to take. Um, in terms of trying to tackle this international issue.
Um, this improved sharing of information, but a lot of ground has been covered. Um, and really ratification is all about moving it from a, um, a position where we're doing things predominantly through consent and by speaking to other countries and, um, trying to support each other with the work. This is actually formalizing that. And in my view is the next step that we need to take. Um, in terms of trying to tackle this international issue.
14:44
14:44
14:44
14:45
14:45
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Yeah. Um I think. It's difficult for us because we've adopted MacLean, if you like, and we've been running with it. Um and and as John said, there are some, you know, it's, it's a bit by consent rather than by, uh the framework, but um we haven't suffered particularly because of that, but it's hard to say until the other countries do ratify and do become part of it. Uh, that, that you would hope would increase the benefits as it becomes bigger, but I've not seen, um, a direct problem, if you like, for from the slowness of the ratification.
14:45
14:46
14:46
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Yes. Sure. Um, I mean, as I've already touched on really that um we've had the Sports Betting Integrity forum, although it had a different name at the beginning. Uh, the tripartite group has been in place since 2012. Um, as a result of the, the Parry report from 2010. Um and since 2015 we have published a sports and sports betting integrity action plan. Um, and it's the service plan and approach reflects the objects of the Macklin convention.
Um, and basically we do fulfil the criteria of um that's required by article 13, you know, with our national platform. Um, and that's largely with the big support of the sports Betting intelligence unit and the Gambling Commission, because they put an awful lot of effort into this, um, to, to, to help us to be compliant, if you like, before we've ratified. Um, and so there are some really good positives that have come out of it as well, because we have, um, lots of stakeholders and all of those stakeholders are relevant in this field.
You know, we have player associations, betting operators, gambling regulators, police agencies, CPS, um and government DCMs are all involved in the Sports Betting Integrity forum all working towards the action plan. So, so a lot of that is already in place. I think that supports the process. The other part of it as well is that um, you know, because we've got the SBI you in place and there is a requirement for um suspicious activity to be reported to them. And there's an additional requirement for them to support sports governing body in breaches of their, um, their rules.
So there's an awful lot of things in place, um, that already I would suggest um go towards what would be required with the ratification.
Um, and basically we do fulfil the criteria of um that's required by article 13, you know, with our national platform. Um, and that's largely with the big support of the sports Betting intelligence unit and the Gambling Commission, because they put an awful lot of effort into this, um, to, to, to help us to be compliant, if you like, before we've ratified. Um, and so there are some really good positives that have come out of it as well, because we have, um, lots of stakeholders and all of those stakeholders are relevant in this field.
You know, we have player associations, betting operators, gambling regulators, police agencies, CPS, um and government DCMs are all involved in the Sports Betting Integrity forum all working towards the action plan. So, so a lot of that is already in place. I think that supports the process. The other part of it as well is that um, you know, because we've got the SBI you in place and there is a requirement for um suspicious activity to be reported to them. And there's an additional requirement for them to support sports governing body in breaches of their, um, their rules.
So there's an awful lot of things in place, um, that already I would suggest um go towards what would be required with the ratification.
14:48
14:48
14:48
14:48
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
In terms of bets that have been placed. But yeah, there will be um checks on individuals that are placing bets. Yes. Um, so if you open up a remote betting account, you'll need to go through that verification process. I'm not aware of any um specific match fixing cases where, you know, children, for example, or we're seeing examples of accounts being opened by, um, you know, people that are underage, for example. I'm not seeing that as an issue at all.
Okay. And what you do sometimes see is things like, um, Smurf accounts being created, false details being used to open accounts. And that to me is where industry needs to be really alive to the dangers, because that would be a, you know, a way of extracting money from the system.
Okay. And what you do sometimes see is things like, um, Smurf accounts being created, false details being used to open accounts. And that to me is where industry needs to be really alive to the dangers, because that would be a, you know, a way of extracting money from the system.
14:49
14:49
14:50
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Thank you. Um, although, having said it, I think you have answered some of the questions already. Um, the, the point I was going to try and make is that I wonder if John and Nigel could agree that you've been achieving a great deal without a legal framework, which is now being proposed and being brought forward. Um, you've said effectively that you're doing most of what is all required. Could you narrow that down and just be a bit more specific about what additionality do you think will come from the ratification process?Perhaps Nigel first.
14:50
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Yeah, I think the key part is that an awful lot of it at the moment is within anticipation of ratification. So a lot of the support that we've got, sorry, a lot of the support that we've got and a lot of the things we're doing come as a result of us signing the convention and, and now moving towards ratification. It's quite hard to actually assess what the position would be if we weren't in that position. And I don't know if John's got a view on that.
14:51
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Um. yeah. Completely agree Nigel. I think, I think from our perspective, um, a lot of the work that's been achieved is because we've been moving towards ratification as a number of other countries have to, if we decided not to sign up to that, that could have an impact, I think, on, on the current approach and the work that's taking place to date. Um, in terms of where the potential gaps are, if there are any, obviously, I think in terms of our compliance with it, we are in a strong place.
I do think there's more that can be done from an enforcement perspective. Um, and that's something that I think signing up to the MacLean, uh, sorry, ratifying the convention will really allow us to try and really take that next step forward. We do have, for example, a member of CPS that sits on, um, SB, for example. So we do have some of the components in place already. Um, but I'd really like to move from a mature intelligence environment around sports betting and match fixing to actual targeted action.
And that can't just sit with the gambling commission. That's something that we would absolutely need to take forward, you know, nationally to other law enforcement teams as well.
I do think there's more that can be done from an enforcement perspective. Um, and that's something that I think signing up to the MacLean, uh, sorry, ratifying the convention will really allow us to try and really take that next step forward. We do have, for example, a member of CPS that sits on, um, SB, for example. So we do have some of the components in place already. Um, but I'd really like to move from a mature intelligence environment around sports betting and match fixing to actual targeted action.
And that can't just sit with the gambling commission. That's something that we would absolutely need to take forward, you know, nationally to other law enforcement teams as well.
14:52
14:52
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Sorry, sorry. I was just going to say I think it's absolutely fundamental to success is that we don't just focus on the participants in sport. Um, which is where the sport's governing bodies come in. But we do need to, to go to the corruptors and we do need to go to the people that are coordinating the activity. And the dilemma for sports governing bodies is we can't touch that. So it's absolutely essential that we get law enforcement involvement.
Who can spread the net wider and can actually get behind it to get the more serious offenders, if you like, in this area.
Who can spread the net wider and can actually get behind it to get the more serious offenders, if you like, in this area.
14:52
14:53
14:53
14:53
14:53
14:53
14:53
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
Could I put the question the other way round?Because all the questions we've asked you about the international dimension relate to the way in which we are able to pursue these crimes. Uh, how much would ratifying Maslin help other ratifies of masculine pursue these crimes in a way which they cannot do now?
14:54
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
So in terms of taking, taking this forward, post ratification, um, I think we've we've probably covered it in certainly Nigel's covered it in terms of it's, it's still, in my view, at the early stages. I think a lot of that work still needs to be done and taken place, but post ratification, it's all about trying to strengthen the existing approach that we've got at the moment. So it's great that things are working well, and there's lots of examples of cases that we're able to take action on, where I think we need to move to next is like really trying to build that enforcement model, really trying to share those experiences and successes on an international basis to really try and drive that, um, international enforcement approach, which isn't, isn't, isn't quite joined up enough in my view at the moment.
So certainly by moving forward to ratification, that I think is the next stage for um, countries that are. Involved, um, with that convention. And obviously once we get past ratification, we will have a seat at the table. We'll be able to try and drive through some of those, you know, areas of concern or change that we think are necessary to really take this work forward. So I don't think we should underestimate that as a key. Um, a key area that we would really be able to take forward once we, once we move forward to ratification.
So certainly by moving forward to ratification, that I think is the next stage for um, countries that are. Involved, um, with that convention. And obviously once we get past ratification, we will have a seat at the table. We'll be able to try and drive through some of those, you know, areas of concern or change that we think are necessary to really take this work forward. So I don't think we should underestimate that as a key. Um, a key area that we would really be able to take forward once we, once we move forward to ratification.
14:55
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Thank you. Supplementary question. Lord Anderson. No, um, I just had two brief questions as we come to an end. Firstly, thank you very much for the evidence that you've given. And I just put this and you've probably heard a bit of the tone of that in this room, which is how useful is the convention itself. And by signing up to it, are we thinking, hey, we've done a great job, we've signed the convention now. Now it's sort of somebody else's problem.
The reality we heard last week and this week is it's about enforcement. And unless they're going to invest properly in law enforcement, whether you're in the convention or not, you still have collaboration with other countries, as Baroness Lawler said, and so on. Um, is this just is this a nice to have?Really?Are we are we missing the point by spending a lot of time focusing on this, or do you think it really is relevant in driving the cross-border cooperation that we need in order to crack this problem?
The reality we heard last week and this week is it's about enforcement. And unless they're going to invest properly in law enforcement, whether you're in the convention or not, you still have collaboration with other countries, as Baroness Lawler said, and so on. Um, is this just is this a nice to have?Really?Are we are we missing the point by spending a lot of time focusing on this, or do you think it really is relevant in driving the cross-border cooperation that we need in order to crack this problem?
14:56
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
My view, it's highly relevant. I look at the work that the team sports betting intelligence team have done over the last few years in this space, working alongside Nigel with the, the SPF group. And for me, it's, it's one step on a much longer process, but it's one that I absolutely think we should be taking. Um, I think there are huge benefits of being part of that, um, convention. We can really continue to drive that intelligence, um, sharing of intelligence. We benefit from that as a country as much as we share with other other countries as well.
Um, it will not be the final solution, final outcome. I very much see this as a, um, a step on a journey that we need to take. We will need to continue to put resource and effort and time and dedication into really trying to make a difference in this space. And that needs not just the gambling commission, but obviously the colleagues around the table and obviously the forum as well.
Um, it will not be the final solution, final outcome. I very much see this as a, um, a step on a journey that we need to take. We will need to continue to put resource and effort and time and dedication into really trying to make a difference in this space. And that needs not just the gambling commission, but obviously the colleagues around the table and obviously the forum as well.
14:57
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Yeah. Thank you. My final question, please, colleagues. We've got a few minutes, three minutes or so. Um, Malta, which was raised by Baroness Ainley. I am interested in uh, why, why it's such an issue for Malta. And is there anything that could be an issue for our betting industry?And I, I have an interest in technology business that makes these sort of settlement bots, uh, for all these different companies and so on. We wouldn't want to find that accidentally.
We've limited legitimate activity through this. Whereas Malta clearly thinks that it has, which is a weakness because then the EU isn't signing up to it. Could you just explain in layman's terms why it's an issue for Malta and what we should be aware of?
We've limited legitimate activity through this. Whereas Malta clearly thinks that it has, which is a weakness because then the EU isn't signing up to it. Could you just explain in layman's terms why it's an issue for Malta and what we should be aware of?
14:58
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
I'm not aware of the specific issues in relation to Malta, but I can certainly comment on the GB marketplace. So in terms of requirements for the GB licence, it's covered by the covered through licence conditions. Um obviously through our our strategic objectives around keeping crime out of gambling as well. So um that network's been in place for a significant period of time already. We still get the intelligence flow from industry as they're required to do. Um, and we've not noticed or been aware of any concerns around that model.
Um.
Um.
14:59
14:59
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Absolutely not. It's very much dependent on um operators having the right systems and software in place. But they need those systems and software in place anyway, because I've seen these comply with, for example, AML requirements. Um, they've got to have those strong systems in place and be vigilant. That's the requirement.
14:59
14:59
15:00
15:00
15:00
15:01
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Obviously the remit of the Gambling Commission doesn't include Northern Ireland, which as you said, I'm sure you're aware. So there could be an area there that the Northern Ireland devolved Assembly might need to review. Section 13 of the betting, gaming, Lotteries and Amusements Amendment Act 2022. Just to make sure that it's sufficiently addresses the issue of cheating offences in Northern Ireland in line with the convention as well. So there's something there that could potentially need to be looked at, but it's difficult for me to comment because it comes outside of our our sort of area really.
But in terms of the impact on the GB market that the Gambling Commission are responsible for, for regulating, we're not anticipating any issues.
But in terms of the impact on the GB market that the Gambling Commission are responsible for, for regulating, we're not anticipating any issues.
15:01
15:01
15:01
15:02
15:02
15:02
15:02
15:03
15:03
15:03
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Um, in my view, by joining the treaty, we're going to increase the speed. I think that's where it's going to be really important. Yeah. So countries that are um, signed up, fully ratified. There's a massive, real big opportunity in my view, to actually share things on a much, you know, much, much faster basis. Um, and I think as the, um, as the work of that group starts to take pace, we'll be able to increase that speed. And that to me is one of the key components to take the work.
15:04
15:04
15:04
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
Thank you. If I could just bring that to light. We had, um, a significant number of sanctions recently that came out of a work with the Belgian law enforcement agency. And ultimately we ended up sanctioning 72 individuals for breaches of our rules. Um, but because of the fact that the law, um, there proceedings took precedence, it meant that we were not dealing with those cases until a number of years down the line. Um, and clearly to protect the sport, you want to be able to take action as quickly as you can and remove people from the sport.
So that speed is, is so essential in terms of protecting the integrity of the sport.
So that speed is, is so essential in terms of protecting the integrity of the sport.
13:44
13:44
13:44
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Thank you very much indeed. Thank you. Nigel Moore and Karen Moorhouse, thank you very much for coming and joining us. Please do send us any supplementary information you might have to help us in our inquiries. And we hope to produce a report at some point over the coming months. But you could not have been more helpful, and we're very grateful for your time. So thank you very much indeed. And thank you, Nigel.