Lords Committee Calls for Comprehensive Ban on Gambling Advertising

^{The House of Lords Liaison Committee published its follow-up report on gambling advertising on 17 September 2026. (Photo: UK Parliament / Wikimedia Commons)}

A cross-party House of Lords committee has called for a comprehensive ban on gambling advertising in Great Britain, describing it as the single most effective way to reduce gambling harm. The recommendation lands in Gambling Harm – Time for Action: Follow-up report, published by the House of Lords Liaison Committee on 17 September 2026 as HL Paper 52.

The report revisits the July 2020 findings of the Select Committee on the Social and Economic Impact of the Gambling Industry, which pushed for a public health approach to gambling. Six years on, the Liaison Committee concluded that the strongest of those recommendations had been largely unaddressed while the advertising landscape changed beyond recognition.

That matters now because the Government is weighing several gambling policy decisions at once, from advertising rules to the tax treatment of machines and online play. A committee of peers recommending a near-total advertising ban gives ministers a formal, evidenced document to respond to rather than a campaign demand, and it sets the terms of the debate for the rest of this parliamentary session.

What the Committee Recommended

The Committee said a comprehensive ban represents the most effective policy option available to advance the Government's stated aim of reducing gambling harms, and a vital part of a public health approach. It echoed the 2020 committee in recommending that on-course advertising for betting on horseracing and greyhound racing be exempted.

Peers estimated that between 1.0 and 1.5 million adults in Great Britain gamble in a way that may be described as problem gambling. The report points to a sector that is heavily reliant on a small share of higher-spending customers and that derives disproportionate profits from people in deprived areas.

The Committee also set out detailed fallback measures on advertising regulation, to apply if the Government declines a full ban or uses them during a transition period. Governments to date, it said, have been far too passive in reacting to the explosion of digital advertising and to newer techniques such as content marketing, which blurs the line between advertising and editorial and appeals strongly to children.

The Economic Argument

Before the Gambling Act 2005 liberalised the rules, only bingo, football pools, the National Lottery, and other permitted lotteries could advertise on television and radio. Since then, the report says, the volume of advertising has exploded, with the industry spending over £1 billion each year.

The Committee argued that meaningful action on gambling harm would produce long-term economic benefits, both by cutting the economic cost of problem gambling and by moving spending into other parts of the economy. Lord Foster of Bath, a member of the former committee and its acting former Chair, cited research from the Sheffield Centre for Health and Related Research.

'There are clear health and economic benefits to reducing participation in gambling, with a recent study by the Sheffield Centre for Health and Related Research estimating that a 10% reduction in spending on gambling could lead to an increase in GVA of £1.25 billion and create over 22,000 jobs.'

Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede, Senior Deputy Speaker and Chair of the Liaison Committee, said in the published announcement that the time was right to reassess the policy area, and that substantial developments in gambling advertising since 2020 had demanded a re-evaluation of the options. The full report is available from the House of Lords Liaison Committee.

The Industry Response and What Happens Next

The Betting and Gaming Council, whose members have repeatedly clashed with regulators over how gambling is promoted, rejected the findings. Speaking with the Guardian, 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.

Peers addressed that argument directly. The Committee said stronger action against unregulated gambling is needed, but it was unconvinced by claims that restricting advertising by licensed operators would push customers towards the illegal market, and it said concerns about that market must not block action on harms from the licensed sector.

The recommendation is not law and carries no automatic effect. The Government now has to respond to the report, and its answer will show whether ministers intend to legislate, adopt the narrower regulatory measures the Committee set out as an alternative, or leave the current rules in place while other gambling reforms proceed.