UK Gambling Commission Proposes New Measures to Enhance Gaming Machine Safety
Published on by Zena Grantham
The UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) is to conduct a 16-week public consultation from 29 January to 20 May 2025 to improve gambling safety in the UK. The primary focus is the proposed updates to the Gaming Machine Technical Standards (GMTS), the Gaming Machine Testing Strategy, and Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (LCCP).
Key Proposals:
Introduction of New Standards and Codes:
Introduce five technical standards, a licensing requirement, and a guideline for social responsibility to help players use gaming machines safely. This includes proposals for time and monetary limits, providing safer gambling messaging and displaying net position and session duration.
Amendments to Existing Standards:
Revise three standards based on industry suggestions. These include enhancing customer satisfaction and gameplay while ensuring the improvements do not jeopardise player safety.
Consolidation of Technical Standards:
Merge the existing 12 gaming machine technical standards into a single comprehensive standard. The format will align more closely with the Commission’s Remote Gambling and Software Technical Standards.
Removal of Obsolete Material:
Revise the GMTS and the associated testing strategy to remove outdated information and ensure the standards align with current technologies and practices.
Tim Miller, the UKGC’s Executive Director for Research and Policy, emphasized the importance of these proposals, stating:
“The White Paper states that a top priority is ensuring that gambling happens safely. The commission shares this commitment, and today’s consultation proposes how we could implement gaming machine changes in the land-based sector.
“We recognise that regulatory changes that impact the design of machines can come with considerable costs. The UKGC are encouraging consumers, gambling operators and other groups to share evidence that will assist us in measuring the likely regulatory impacts of the proposed changes and the likely costs of implementing them. This evidence will be invaluable to helping make a robust assessment on whether the benefits to consumers are proportionate to the costs involved.”