Written by Jon Bryan | Expected reading time 5 mins
Last Updated: April 18, 2025
Written by Jon Bryan
As reported by SlotsHawk last year, this month sees the introduction of a maximum bet for online slots. It will be £5 a spin. Those who campaigned for this change believe it could herald a significant decline in the level of gambling harm. My concern is that it will likely have no effect on that, and gambling reform activists will just come back for more. Like so much of the campaigning to change and restrict what gamblers do, there never seems to be a point by which activists are happy with what they have achieved.
ASSESSING THE IMPACT
Whatever the impact on problem gambling, these changes will undoubtedly have an impact on both gamblers and the gambling industry, as is made clear in the government’s impact assessment of these changes. I don’t have a view as to what the maximum stake for online slots should be, but I can’t see any real justification for the limit to be set at five pounds, other than a vague notion that “a fiver seems about right”.
When consulting about the change to online slots, the idea of a £2/£5 limit appears to be a recommendation from the Gambling Commission. Those levels were amongst several suggestions where the government consulted on setting the limits. But the same extensive document doesn’t tell us what effect these changes could have on important things like the level of problem gambling. That is why I am doubtful that they will have the desired effect. One telling admission is the following statement:
“It is difficult to accurately estimate a level of gambling harm reduction from each of the shortlisted options.”
In other words, they don’t know. The counterargument for this in the impact assessment appears to be that there is a need to do something. Every time the ‘do nothing’ option is listed as a possibility; it is followed by the assertion that by doing it would just make things worse. For example, at one point the “do nothing” option is followed by this un-evidenced generality:
“Harmful gambling behaviour…(will)…likely worsen.”
For the government then, the status quo is never the right option, even when there is a lack of evidence to introduce a change. When politics means that there is a need to show you are doing something, policy often suffers as a result.
DOUBTS ABOUT LEGISLATION
I have always had my doubts about this legislation, but even more so when you look at two other aspects of it.
First, as the Statutory Instrument confirms, this is only about online slots, as ‘the stake limits are for online slots only and do not apply to other casino games, such as roulette or blackjack.’ But why just that aspect of online gambling? What’s so different about slots compared to roulette? Or is it the type of player that is different? This could be a trojan horse for further legislation and restrictions, as I cannot see a rationale for the differentiation. I suspect that when this regulation has little/no impact on the levels of problem gambling, the legislators will just come back for more.
Secondly, and more importantly, this legislation introduces a new category of adult, which I have written about elsewhere. The limit of £5 a spin changes to £2 a spin next month (21/05/25) for those aged 18-24. Young adults, it seems, cannot yet be trusted with a five-pound note – a two-pound coin is all that they can have. This is one of the very concerning aspects of this legislation, and yet it has had almost no kick-back on this issue. The scrutiny that legislators have applied to this is worryingly woeful, as it will surely have unintended consequences elsewhere. What could happen to the age of consent? Or the minimum age for buying and drinking alcohol? What about when we can learn to drive? What about the age when we can vote and stand for election? It is noticeable that none of the groups who want the vote to be extended to 16 and 17-year-olds appear to be complaining about the unfairness of this legislation differentiating between 18–24-year-olds and those aged 25 and over. This aspect of the new legislation is deeply concerning. The age when we are still being seen and treated like children is being increased by default.
WHAT NEXT?
The impact of these changes won’t be known for a while, but they add to an increasing amount of legislation making life more restrictive for gamblers. There are not many people who stand up for gamblers, but the Gamblers Consumers Forum is one such body. Let’s hope that they can have more influence on the gambling landscape as changes to gambling regulations continue to be implemented and discussed.
The government’s first year comes to an end in the summer, and debate around gambling continues. The need to stand up for all those who gamble must be central to that, and we should take every opportunity to make that point to politicians and legislators. And we should be wary about accepting any changes to gambling regulations that have little or no evidence base, or which could be extended and encroach on our liberty. There are important things that we should stand up for in these discussions, and there is no need for us to be shy in doing so.
Jon Bryan is a Gambling Writer and Poker Player. His pamphlet “Risking It All: The freedom to gamble” is available to purchase or free to download. Find more of Jon’s articles for SlotsHawk.
