By the age of 13, Alex Wood was a virtuoso violinist, though he was later sentenced to seven years in prison for fraud. He is now a renowned expert on cybercrime, money laundering and illegal betting operators. Oh, and for good measure, he is a Fellow of the Society of Arts. Just the sort of chap you want in your corner.
Recently, as an experiment, he and I opened a black-market betting account together. I say ‘together’ because we used my identity and his credit card. The unlicensed bookmaker could not have been more helpful. They didn’t care how old we were, whether we had any addiction issues or the fact that our personal and financial details didn’t match. But their attitude soon changed when we struck a winning bet: they wouldn’t send us our winnings.
I mention this because the ramping up of taxes on bookmakers – which inevitably has a negative impact on how much they contribute to racing – and the obstructions the Gambling Commission continues to put in the path of punters who want to bet with regulated bookmakers, are driving the vulnerable into the hands of the fraudulent.
The vast majority of punters will find a black-market bookmaker via their phones who won’t ask difficult questions
‘Illegal operators are already bombarding social media with adverts highlighting the higher costs of UK bookmakers with the promise, “we are licensed outside the UK, so you can enjoy better odds and no need to show proof of earnings”,’ Alex reported last week. ‘The criminals are masquerading as trusted and legitimate platforms with increasing use of AI and deepfakes of popular celebrities to drive brand acceptance.’
What became apparent in the run-up to the Budget is that the government is distrustful of the data about black-market bookmakers circulated by the British Horseracing Authority, while also being influenced by arguments put forward by the ‘non-partisan’ Social Market Foundation thinktank.
But the BHA is not exactly helping itself. One of its main functions is to convince gambling minister Vicky Foxcroft that racing should be nurtured and supported, not hollowed out by tax rises on bookmakers. One can only wonder what Foxcroft’s reaction was to the appointment to the BHA board of Sir Philip Davies, who notoriously tried to filibuster the ‘Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence Bill’ out of parliament. He spoke for 91 minutes and tabled multiple new clauses before being the sole MP to vote against it. Davies also suggested in a parliamentary debate that disabled people be paid less than the minimum wage. That probably doesn’t sit well with Foxcroft, who was the first MP to ask a question at PMQs using sign language.
I suspect Foxcroft’s attitude to the BHA popping in to press their case won’t be: ‘Oh, it’ll be nice to see Phil again.’ Probably something more like: ‘I’d love to kill that little shit.’
Would it not have been smarter for the BHA to have told the Racecourse Association, who put Davies up for the board, that they’d rather have a Labour councillor geographically connected with Haydock, Aintree or Chester? Someone with a black T-shirt who could go round to No. 10 North, watch TV, eat crisps on the sofa and have an honest conversation with Emperor Andy about the bad vibes wafting around racing?
The SMF, on the other hand, knows exactly how to play this government. Hardly surprising given that its director, Theo Bertram, was formerly one of Gordon Brown’s special advisers. Brown agitated for an increase in tax on gaming machines and the SMF has aggressively supported that stance. But should the SMF, which is a registered charity and was funded by anti-gambling campaigner Derek Webb to the tune of £120,000 last year, be behaving in such a manner?
The SMF would no doubt say the tax increases it was lobbying for in the Budget help gambling addicts but in reality they neither reduce harm – quite the opposite in fact, as they drive people to unlicensed outlets – nor support affected people.
The fear punters will move away from licensed betting shops to the black market was waved away by the SMF’s chief economist Gideon Salutin, yet it’s estimated that £16 billion is wagered illegally in the UK per annum. An SMF report also suggests that raising taxes on gambling will create jobs. It states that a 10 per cent decrease in gambling expenditure will result in an additional 24,000 jobs, even after accounting for losses in the gambling industry. This assumes punters will spend all their money on high-street retail, such as food and clothes, if they don’t gamble in betting shops. But most punters want to have a bet, not buy another coat or eat more bread.
The vast majority of punters will find a black-market bookmaker via their phones who won’t ask any difficult or inconvenient questions. It is time the government realises that betting shops were licensed in the 1970s for a very good reason: they are better than the alternative.
For racing tips, go to Penworthy.
Comments