A House of Lords committee has recommended a comprehensive restriction on gambling advertising across Great Britain, arguing that stronger controls would support efforts to reduce gambling-related harm.
The House of Lords Liaison Committee made the recommendation in its 173-page Gambling Harm—Time for Action: Follow-up report, published on September 17. The cross-party committee described a comprehensive advertising ban as the most effective policy option available to advance the government’s objective of reducing gambling harms.
The proposal would largely reverse the liberalisation of gambling advertising introduced under the Gambling Act 2005. Before those changes, television and radio advertising was permitted for a much narrower group of gambling products, including bingo, football pools and permitted lotteries.
The committee argued that the advertising landscape has changed considerably since then, particularly through digital marketing and online content. It said governments had responded too slowly to the growth of digital gambling promotion and newer forms of marketing that can blur the distinction between advertising and other online material.
Committee Backs Public Health Approach
The latest report follows a 2020 House of Lords inquiry that recommended treating gambling-related harm through a public health framework. Since then, the government has published its 2023 gambling white paper and introduced a statutory gambling levy, with part of the funding directed toward public health functions.
The Liaison Committee now considers advertising reform another important element of that approach. It estimates that between 1 million and 1.5 million adults in Great Britain gamble at a level that can be described as problem gambling.
According to The Guardian, Lord Foster of Bath, who participated in the follow-up inquiry, said: “Up to a million and a half people in Britain experience problem gambling and the serious consequences this has on them, their families and the wider community.”
He added: “A ban on most gambling advertising would reduce gambling and therefore reduce problem gambling and the serious harm it causes.”
The committee acknowledges that its proposed restrictions would reduce the size of the gambling sector. It argues that lower gambling expenditure could produce wider economic benefits if consumers redirect spending elsewhere.
Among the evidence cited was research from the Sheffield Centre for Health and Related Research estimating that a 10% reduction in gambling expenditure could increase gross value added by £1.25 billion and create more than 22,000 jobs. The committee presents those figures as evidence supporting its economic case for tighter advertising controls.
The report also points to tighter approaches adopted elsewhere. Italy introduced a near-comprehensive advertising ban in 2019. The Netherlands has moved toward broader restrictions, and Australia has introduced limits on the frequency of gambling advertising.
Industry Challenges Case for Blanket Ban
Licensed gambling operators and their representatives have disputed the committee’s conclusions.
The Betting and Gaming Council described the recommendations as “deeply misguided” and raised concerns about the potential effect on competition between regulated gambling companies and illegal operators.
BGC Chief Executive Grainne Hurst said: “A blanket advertising ban would remove a key competitive advantage of being licensed and regulated while doing nothing to stop illegal operators targeting British consumers.”
The trade body points to existing advertising requirements and voluntary measures implemented by its members. These include the whistle-to-whistle restriction on television betting advertising around live sporting events. Gambling advertising already operates under rules covering content and the protection of younger audiences.
The illegal gambling market forms a central part of the industry’s argument. The BGC maintains that licensed operators need the ability to advertise so consumers can distinguish regulated companies from unlicensed alternatives.
The committee considered that argument and said it was unconvinced that tighter advertising restrictions on licensed companies would necessarily cause consumers to move to illegal gambling sites. It also acknowledged that stronger measures against the unregulated market remain necessary.
Questions about the supporting research have also featured in the debate. Industry consultant Dan Waugh argued that evidence presented to the committee included conflicting findings and questioned whether the inquiry had sufficiently examined possible unintended effects.
Government Response Still Required
The recommendations do not automatically change UK gambling law. The government is under no obligation to adopt them, although it is expected to provide a formal response to the committee.
The debate comes as the Department for Culture, Media and Sport has separately considered changes involving gambling promotion. A consultation published in July proposed banning sponsorship arrangements involving gambling operators that are not licensed by the Gambling Commission when their services are theoretically unavailable in Great Britain.
Prime Minister Andy Burnham has previously taken a critical position on some aspects of gambling’s presence in local communities and sport. Burnham became prime minister in July 2026, meaning the Lords recommendations will now be considered under his government.
Any decision on a comprehensive advertising ban would have consequences beyond gambling operators. Betting sponsorship and advertising provide commercial revenue across parts of British sport, including football and other competitions.
The committee nevertheless maintains that its proposed restriction would provide a more effective response to gambling harm than the existing advertising framework. The regulated industry disputes that assessment and argues that policy should account more heavily for the competitive position of licensed operators against illegal gambling sites.