Backlash to new Gambling Policy body

iGaming Business reported that a new, non-statutory Gambling Policy Commission (GPC) has launched in Great Britain, immediately drawing industry criticism over its funding, purpose, timing and membership composition.

What happened

• The GPC announced it will examine gambling policy in Great Britain but sits outside the statutory regulatory framework. Its debut comes while measures from the UK government’s 2023 gambling white paper are still being put into effect.
• Regulus Partners’ Dan Waugh questioned how the commission is funded and its links to other reform organisations. The GPC’s website states seed funding was provided “philanthropically” by Derek Webb, the former professional poker player who founded the Campaign for Fairer Gambling. iGB said it had sought comment from Webb but had not received a response at the time of publication.
• Waugh also objected to how the GPC compares itself with the 2000–01 Gambling Review Body chaired by Sir Alan Budd. He noted Budd’s review was government-commissioned, while the new GPC has no equivalent mandate. He argued any serious review must acknowledge the policy “central dilemma” between personal freedom and protection from harm, and offer nuanced recommendations rather than aggregating demands from aligned groups.
• Helen Walton, CCO and founder of G Gaming, raised accountability concerns, saying a government or select committee review carries built-in accountability, whereas a self-appointed parallel body risks adding pressure and confusion. She added any credible review should assess what recent tax and affordability measures have meant for the regulated market.
• Gibraltar’s gambling commissioner, Andrew Lyman, questioned the absence of industry representation on the GPC and asked how evidence could be weighed objectively without it.
• The GPC is chaired by Professor Jagjit Chadha OBE (University of Cambridge), with University of Reading professor James Reade as chief economist. An eight-member panel spans economics, law, public policy, health, academia and sport, including Social Market Foundation senior fellow James Noyes and Gambling with Lives trustee Professor Janet O’Sullivan. iGB reported it had approached Chadha for comment but had not received a response.
• Attention also turned to the statutory regulator. Waugh suggested the Gambling Commission’s fitness and propriety could warrant scrutiny and questioned whether a new Gambling Act is needed given the scope of existing powers and secondary legislation. Gambling consultant Steve Donoughue called the Commission an anti-gambling lobby and argued the industry should fund independent research and lobbying, warning of an existential threat if it does not. Walton, however, said the regulator is engaging with industry and already looks at new products.
• On status and transparency, Lyman noted that calling the body a “Commission” implies official standing. iGB reported the GPC’s own website uses both “Commission” and “Committee.”
• The Gambling Commission told iGB it had not been informed of the new group and stressed there is no formal link: the GPC is not statutory and plays no role in regulating gambling in Great Britain. The regulator said its priority is completing and evaluating the white paper reforms, drawing on evidence from industry and consumers. The Betting and Gaming Council similarly urged that the reforms be allowed time to bed in and be properly evaluated.

Why it matters

• For UK-facing operators and affiliates, the emergence of a non-statutory policy voice could complicate an already active period of regulatory change. Depending on how the GPC positions its work, it may influence debate around the white paper’s implementation or add competing narratives into the policy space.
• The pointed focus on funding sources and links to other advocacy groups may heighten scrutiny of lobbying around gambling regulation. Greater transparency could be demanded of any body seeking to shape policy, whether industry-backed or reform-focused.
• Calls to review the Gambling Commission itself, contrasted with other voices saying the regulator is constructively engaging with industry, underline a divide that could shape how compliance expectations evolve. Operators may prefer to maintain a clear understanding of their licence obligations; readers who need a refresher can refer to our licence check guidance at /trust/licence-check.
• If, as suggested by some stakeholders, the impact of tax and affordability changes on the regulated market becomes a focal point, that discussion could inform how player due diligence and market competitiveness are judged. Players curious about how gambling wins are treated in the UK can consult our overview at /guides/gambling-tax.

What to watch

1. Whether the GPC clarifies its status, remit and funding in more detail, and whether it adjusts its panel to include industry expertise.
2. The scope and tone of the GPC’s first outputs: do they weigh consumer protection and personal freedom in a balanced way, with transparent evidence standards?
3. Any formal reaction beyond the Gambling Commission’s initial distancing, including whether policymakers engage with, ignore or challenge the GPC’s work.
4. How the ongoing white paper implementation is evaluated by the regulator and industry, and whether evidence from operators, consumers and academics leads to further refinement of measures.
5. The intensity of broader scrutiny on the regulator’s performance and governance, given calls from some quarters for a review of its fitness and propriety.
6. Industry organisation and research: whether operators coalesce around a shared evidence base to inform debate, or rely on ad hoc responses during consultations.

If you need help resolving an issue with a UK-licensed operator, our neutral guidance on next steps is at /trust/disputes.

Related guides

• [How Slots Work](/how-slots-work)
• [Bonus Types](/bonus-types)
• [Wagering Requirements](/wagering-requirements)

Source

This article is based on the report "‘Bizarre’ commission faces lobbying questions and industry backlash" published by iGaming Business on 10 November 2026.

Staying in control

Gambling should be budgeted like any other leisure spend. Set deposit and time limits, keep a record of your play, and step back if it stops being fun. Use reality checks and cooling-off tools, and never chase losses. For more tips and tools, see /responsible-gambling.

Gambling is for adults aged 18 and over. If you’re worried about your gambling or someone else’s, free confidential support is available from the National Gambling Helpline on 0808 8020 133.