Memorandum from Royal Ministry of Culture
and Church Affairs (DGB 46)
With reference to press notice of 19 November
2003, the Norwegian Ministry of Culture and Church Affairs hereby
wishes to present written evidence to the Joint Committee for
the Draft Gambling Bill on issues concerning remote gambling.
1. The ministries responsible for gambling
regulation in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland and Finland have
established a civil servant working group on gambling matters.
The main purpose of the group is to exchange information on gambling
legislation and address the question of gambling over the Internet.
This group has been following the development of the international
gaming market on the Internet and the proposals for the reformation
of British gaming legislation very closely.
2. Gaming in the Nordic countries has traditionally
been a restricted activity, permitted only in accordance with
stringent legislation. The main purpose of our restrictive legislation
is to uphold legitimate interests with regard to public policy
and order as well as to limit damaging social consequences such
as problem gambling and fraud. A second reason is that betting
and lotteries may make a significant contribution to the financing
of benevolent or public interest activities such as social and
charitable undertakings, sport or culture.
3. Gambling has up to now been a terrestrial
activity where countries have been able to determine their own
legislation, which may differ from legislation in other countries.
Remote gambling over the Internet introduces gambling as a cross-border
activity. We therefore consider it to be of the utmost importance
that the member states of the international community address
this area through open discussion, with the objective of containing
and determining the conditions for the development of this form
of gambling with regard to negative social consequences.
4. We acknowledge that Great Britain wishes
to confront the problem of offshore-based Internet operations
targeting British citizens, and to contain and regulate these
gaming offers within Great Britain accordingly. We are however
concerned with the negative cross-border consequences such a policy
may entail, as no limitations to the extent and content of remote
gambling outside Great Britain have been laid out in the Draft
Gambling Bill. If implemented, such a policy would seriously limit
the liberty of the governments and parliaments in the neighbouring
countries of Great Britain to pursue an independent national gaming
policy. It would also undermine the sovereignty of our and other
countries in setting limits to the growth of the market and would
force them to accept forms of gambling that are not a part of
their gambling tradition.
5. We also fear that a liberalized British
policy on remote gambling with the clear objective of exporting
British gambling services will lead to much stronger competition
on the emerging global Internet gaming market, which at present
is not subject to any international regulation at all. This market
is deemed by a great majority of the member states in the international
community to be a dark zone for potentially dangerous criminal
activities. We have also reason to believe that such a development
will lead to an uncontrolled increase in problems with gaming
related to remote gambling over the Internet.
6. As we understand it, these concerns are
not unique to the Nordic countries. The European Court of Justice
has also accepted these concerns as legitimate in several rulings
allowing Member States of the European Union to pursue individual
policies with regard to gaming legislation limiting their obligations
as laid down in the EU treaty.
7. Internationally, there are clear indications
amongst an overwhelming and growing majority of OECD countries
towards the formulation of a norm of respect, committing countries
not to allow gaming operators established in their territory to
provide games to citizens of other countries, unless special agreements
exist. We believe that many countries share the view that regulation
of the gaming market is primarily a concern for the individual
state.
8. Taking into account the widely practised
policy of respect for national regulation in the international
community, we ask the British parliament to take into consideration
the legitimate interests of the Nordic and other countries upon
its deliberation and assessment of the Draft Gambling Bill on
the issue of remote gambling. As an interactive media which is
recognised as having a revolutionary long-term impact on our societies,
the Internet calls for internationally coordinated actions in
order to avoid any disillusionment on the part of citizens.
9. The Nordic countries have already been
in contact with, and held a meeting with, the Department of Culture,
Media and Sport regarding our concern in respect of the proposals
on remote gambling. During these discussions representatives of
the Nordic countries were advised to refer the matter to the Committee.
A copy of our letter of 15 May 2003 is enclosed.
10. Finally, it should be emphasised that
the Nordic countries are ready at any time to provide the Committee
with any information needed for further clarification of our view
on the matter of remote gambling. Representatives of the Nordic
countries are more than willing to attend any hearing in London
the Committee may wish to hold on this matter.
December 2003
Dear Tessa Jowell,
The Nordic countries have been following very
closely the formulation of the proposals for reforming the gaming
regulation and industry of Great Britain. Indeed, national regulations
for gaming activities need to be considered in light of the new
reality, with a rapidly growing, global gaming market.
We agree with the considerations made in Great
Britain—action is needed and action will require delicate
considerations of a complex situation. It is our sincere believe
that gaming, as a new cross-boarder phenomenon, requires international
co-operation and agreements.
In our Nordic countries, gaming has traditionally
been thoroughly regulated in order to uphold legitimate interests
of public policy and order. The aim and the first ground for these
restrictions and prohibitions is to avoid damaging social consequences
such as problem gambling and fraud.
A second ground, which is not without relevance,
is that lotteries may make a significant contribution to the financing
of benevolent or public interest activities such as social and
charitable works, sport or culture.
As we understand these concerns are not unique
for the Nordic countries. Literally all European countries share
this view in one way or another. The European Court of Justice
has accepted these concerns as legitimate in several rulings.
Consequently, it is acknowledged that the Member States of the
European Union have legitimate reasons for regulating the gaming
market in order to protect society from the negative aspects of
gaming.
Internationally, there are clear signs amongst
an overwhelming and growing majority of OECD countries, towards
a formulation of a norm of respect meaning that states cannot
accept that gaming providers established in their territory provides
games to citizens of other countries, unless special agreements
exists. Thus, we believe that many countries with us share the
view that regulation of the gaming market primarily is a concern
for the state in question.
In the light of this, we are seriously worried
about the policy proposals that will permit British providers
of interactive gaming and betting to compete globally on the new
Internet market.
While we acknowledge the need to confront the
problem of offshore based Internet operations that target British
citizens we are deeply concerned about the negative cross-border
consequences of such a globalisation policy in the absence of
agreements in the European Union or/and other international organisations.
If implemented, such a policy would seriously
limit the liberty of the neighbouring countries of Great Britain
to pursue an independent national gaming policy, including a policy
of liberalisation restricted to national territory, with respect
to the protection of consumers and measures against crime and
pathological gaming.
Taking into account the widely practised policy
of respect for national regulation in the international society,
we urge the British government to take into consideration the
legitimate interests of the Nordic countries as it goes on to
deliberate further on a reform of the British gaming legislation.
In order to take the first step in a direction
towards international co-operation, we propose that our policy
advisors meet to pave the way for a common understanding of the
problems we are facing.
We rest assured that it will indeed prove possible
to develop an understanding between our countries as far as the
determination of jurisdiction on the new on-line gaming market
is concerned.
| 
