and its value over that period of time. That’s something that I think seems to have been lost in Europe. The recognition of the fact that so much value, so much tax, so much job creation has been achieved through the development of the industry with these new technologies. These are all things, if you go to North America, they are still reasonably optimistic and understand the value of the industry. Europe, not so much. Africa, again, sees the opportunities, the Middle East full of creative ideas, both in banking and in gambling because of Sharia. But they see opportunities. The same in Asia. Europe seems to have lost its way somewhat, even though the numbers would suggest we shouldn’t have. SP: I agree that the bashing of the industry seems to be mainly a European privilege. And the wind has very much changed in the UK. It is interesting to note that this bashing is somehow different from other parts of the world. You speak a lot with your colleagues in Africa and Asia. Do you see reasons for that? JL: I think some of it is cultural. There is obviously a Christian cultural tradition that has for many hundreds of years been against gambling. That’s not so relevant nowadays across the whole of Europe. But it’s a legacy there, certainly a minority of people still hold that view. I think it’s more the size of the industry. Its pervasiveness if you like. Ironically, it’s still small enough that politically it’s not terribly important. And when you have politicians who are under pressure to deliver on the economy, when you’ve got a housing crisis, when you’ve got rising inflation, any politician is going to go for an easy win. And bashing the gambling industry is an easy win, because there are not enough members of society that participate. Would they do that with alcohol? When people say, you know, the gambling industry, it’s appalling, I say look at the damage the alcohol industry does to society at large. Are they going to ban booze? No, they are not. SP: Emmanuel, you have certainly contemplated about this as well. Maybe two or three decades ago, the discussion was about creating jobs, attracting tourism in the regions that may have not been privileged as much as urban areas. That’s why you would put casinos in such areas. And somehow this has changed. How do you comment on it? EM: I’m not sure if this has changed. I’m from Belgium, and Belgian culture is all about the relationship to religion and the guilt associated with gambling. So, you will not have the average politician standing up in the parliament supporting gambling. But it puts us in a very strange position because only the legal sector will protect people. It’s like a schizophrenic attitude. SP: We have different regulatory systems around the world. In the jurisdictions where the Gaming 1 Group is headquartered, at least in Belgium, you have to some extent the private sector, but there is also a monopoly in the lottery sector where different advertising rules apply. How do you see such situations where there’s not a level playing field? EM: It feels strange that the state can be both shareholder, operator and regulator. The lottery understood that they need to modernize the product, and more and more, the lottery product looks like the private casino product. When you have one system, but two set of rules, it’s very strange, you know, so I think these kind of things should change in the future, if we want something balanced. And if we really care about having the economy and consumer protection for those that need it. SP: Yeah, there seems to be an inherent conflict of interest when the state is in a role of owning and providing gaming services as well as, at the same time, regulating these gaming services. JL: Well, I would make a general comment that governments are schizophrenic. I think that’s a nice way of putting it. You know, most governments will have no trouble conceptualizing in their own mind that if they want to drive revenue and economic growth, then liberalization, having a proper commercial, dynamic and competitive sector is good for business and good for them and their tax return. While at the same time, demonizing the industry in suggesting it’s very bad for people. The most important thing governments or policymakers seem to have lost sight of is the fact that your average consumer is not as stupid as government and regulatory systems would imply. When I started in regulation, it was all about looking at operators and making sure they’re fit and proper, and there’s no criminal infiltration. Now I’m a consumer protection specialist because 90% of my work is making sure that a tiny segment of the gaming population have access to the tools to look after themselves. That’s a radical change. Tell me another industry where this happens. It’s
10
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker