The Creutzmann conundrum
The European Parliament must address to what extent a European-level solution for online gambling is needed, but faces some tough decisions, writes Tim McPhie of public affairs consultants APCO Worldwide.
MEPs have tabled a wide range of amendments to the European Parliament’s draft report on online gambling, prepared by German Liberal Jürgen Creutzmann in response to the European Commission’s Green Paper. This is an area where MEPs tend to follow national guidelines more closely than the political group whip in the Parliament. There is significant division within the three major parties, with the consequence that multiple conflicting amendments have been tabled.
What is clear, is that the core question which the Parliament must address is to what extent a European-level solution is needed. The original draft report respects member states’ right to regulate, or even close, their markets, but attempts to overlay a framework of minimum standards at European level which should apply in all jurisdictions where online gambling is allowed.
Influential MEP Christel Schaldemose, who drafted the Parliament’s last online gambling report in 2009, calls for this European approach to be limited to law enforcement, administrative co-operation, IT standards and consumer protection. Even if they can agree on scope MEPs are still undecided on whether or not to call for binding EU regulation, indirect legislation via a directive, or a soft set of guidelines. With Creutzmann seeking broad support for his report, a watered-down and non-committal position may be the most likely outcome.
Private operators are keen to see the removal of administrative barriers to market entry. They will find encouragement from calls for streamlined licensing procedures for operators already licensed in one member state. There seems to be no prospect in the short-term for mutual recognition of licensing, and less so for harmonised pan-European licensing, but this first step would probably still be welcomed.
As regards sports betting, there is significant support from MEPs for the French model. Under this system, sports bodies enter into legally binding agreements with operators to define a financial payment for the use of their events. In France sports bodies and operators also agree on the type of bets that can be placed.
A public debate on the amendments will take place in the last week of this month when MEPs return from the summer break. Creutzmann and his colleagues will have to quickly thrash out a number of compromises before the Internal Market Committee votes in mid-September. The full Parliament should then approve the report in October and send it across to the Commission. Stakeholders will no doubt be active after the summer in trying to push through their final thoughts before the Commission then issue a follow-up to the May Green Paper.