UK gambling commission targets pre-election findings on racing funding

By Olivia Hart

The Gambling Policy Commission aims to deliver findings and recommendations before the next UK general election, following an evidence deadline of 12 February 2027. Its chair, Jagjit Chadha OBE, said the review will assess whether existing law requires reform, including possible new primary legislation.

No draft Gambling Act, implementation schedule or guaranteed change to racing’s betting funding emerged at Monday’s launch. The process puts British horseracing’s betting income under policy scrutiny, but it stops short of promising legislative change.

What is the review trying to establish?

The Gambling Policy Commission launched Monday with a “call for evidence from all interested parties and individuals.” Its membership spans economics, law, public policy, health and sport.

Its terms call for an “independent, evidence-based assessment of the existing [legal] framework [around gambling] and consider whether further reform, including potential new primary legislation, may be required.” Chadha, an economics professor at Cambridge University, chairs the commission.

Chadha said:

“The last comprehensive independent review of gambling legislation was undertaken a quarter of a century ago. Since then, both the gambling market and the wider technological environment have changed considerably.

“Our purpose is to examine the evidence carefully and independently, to understand how the existing framework has operated, assess the impact of more recent reforms, and consider what legislative and regulatory framework will be appropriate for the years ahead.

“We want to hear from people and organisations with experience, evidence and expertise across all sides of this debate.”

The GPC says its task resembles Sir Alan Budd’s comprehensive gambling-law review, published in 2001. That review made 176 recommendations; the government accepted the vast majority and included them in the Gambling Act 2005.

The GPC’s case for new scrutiny rests on a quarter-century of market change: rapid online gambling expansion, prediction markets, cryptocurrencies and other new products. Those developments have left the 2005 Act increasingly described as “analogue” legislation in a digital age.

In plain terms, the commission has started the evidence-gathering phase, not the legislative phase.

How could racing’s funding model change?

The GPC’s terms expressly cover “the special position of British horseracing” in gambling’s relationship with sport. Its remit puts two betting-linked funding issues in scope:

• The statutory betting levy.
• Media rights linked to betting turnover.

The GPC’s launch material describes betting on racing as a small fraction of the overall gambling industry. It nevertheless treats that niche as crucial to the sport’s funding and prosperity.

The announcement offers no baseline for racing’s market share, the current levy rate or betting-linked media-rights values. It also gives no signal on whether a future Act would preserve, reduce or expand betting’s contribution to racing.

Any resulting legislation could therefore affect both a central funding stream and important commercial rights. In practical terms, the review creates exposure to policy change without securing a better deal for racing.

Who will shape the evidence?

Two commission members bring direct links to racing’s financing and economics.

• Dr James Reade, head of economics at Reading University, will serve as chief economist. He co-authored a report on the financial and cultural importance of Ascot racecourse, published in June 2026.
• Tom Savill, director of Plumpton Racecourse, co-authored “Securing Racing’s Future,” published in 2025.

The GPC has eight committee members. Its named roster also includes:

• Peter Kellner, a commentator and former president of YouGov.
• Sir Anton Muscatelli, the current president of the Royal Society of Edinburgh.
• Professor Janet O’Sullivan, a leading legal academic.
• Philippe Auclair, a football journalist and commentator.
• Dr James Noyes, a specialist in gambling regulation at the Social Market Foundation think tank.

Reade and Savill give racing two direct routes into the evidence process, but their affiliations do not determine the findings or guarantee favorable treatment.

What must racing prove next?

The commission’s arrival could add considerable impetus to the reform debate around gambling regulation. It also gives racing a formal opportunity to explain why betting supports the sport and why existing arrangements warrant attention.

The strategic case advanced for racing is to emphasize its unique relationship with betting. It also seeks to separate racing from fixed-odds casino and slot-based products, which have become increasingly significant in the gambling sector over the past decade.

That distinction may strengthen racing’s claim for a special statutory position. It does not settle the case: the commission has announced no levy change, media-rights protection or finding that racing deserves preferential treatment.

Before the next election, the commission’s evidence will test whether racing can show that its betting links justify continued special consideration in any new law.