BHA Censure of UKGC’s FRA Engagement Intensifies

The British Horseracing Authority (BHA) has pushed back against the Gambling Commission’s claim that it proactively consulted stakeholders ahead of the Financial Risk Assessments (FRAs) announcement. The dispute centres on how much the regulator actually engaged with the racing body before the 7 July decision.

Sarah Gardner, the Gambling Commission’s Acting Chief Officer, told the Culture, Media and Sport Committee last week that the BHA had been individually invited to discuss the legislative measure. She noted that the Authority only responded after a follow-up email was sent. “In our letter which we sent to the BHA on [7 July], we set out further details and offered a further meeting to discuss the decision,” Gardner said, adding that she was pleased the BHA eventually accepted the offer.

However, the Racing Post has since published findings that paint a different picture. According to a freedom of information request, the BHA had spent two months trying to arrange bilateral talks before the Commission’s FRA announcement, but the regulator did not engage during that period. A BHA spokesperson told the publication: “We’re disappointed that the Gambling Commission’s response to the Culture, Media and Sport Committee’s letter does not recognise our concern about its engagement with stakeholders and due process. … The Commission did not engage with the BHA in the weeks leading up to the board’s decision and subsequent announcement on July 7. This was despite our best efforts to do so.”

The lack of published evidence ahead of the FRA rollout has drawn widespread criticism from both the gambling and racing sectors. Gardner acknowledged that the full evidence base would not be released until the Autumn, explaining that implementation groups – including operators and credit reference agencies – would meet over summer to shape the consultation response.

The BHA, however, maintains that the regulator’s failure to provide supporting evidence before making a decision is a fundamental flaw. The spokesperson said: “The Commission has now admitted that taking the decision to implement affordability checks without publishing the evidence was outside its normal process. The letter quotes its previous commitment to publish ‘a final and full response to the consultation with our decision’.” The Authority also took aim at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, stating that it “continues to delegate policymaking to an unelected quango.”

It remains unclear whether the release of the full methodology and evidence later this year will satisfy stakeholders who feel the process has been opaque.