Canadian Senators Consider Limits on Sports Betting Advertisements
This week, Bill S-269, the National Framework on Advertising for Sports Betting Act, was examined during two Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications meetings. Discussions included contributions from Sen. Marty Deacon, the bill's sponsor, Sen. Brent Cotter, and representatives from various organizations such as Sport Canada, the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), and the Canadian Lottery Coalition. The focus was on the advertising of sports wagering in Ontario.
Several lawmakers who supported Bill C-218, which legalized single-event sports betting in 2021, expressed regret over their decision. While not necessarily wishing to reverse the legalization, they lamented the lack of foresight regarding advertising issues.
“I wish we had considered the flood of advertising that would follow,” said Deacon during Tuesday’s meeting, describing the pervasive presence of sports betting ads on TV, mobile games, and sports equipment. She emphasized the negative impact of this "barrage" of advertisements.
Three years after the passage of Bill C-218, the current discussion centers on how to control the nationwide advertising of online and mobile sports betting.
“We have the privilege of sober second thought,” Deacon stated. “We have the opportunity to fix this.”
What Does the Legislation Entail?
First introduced last summer, Bill S-269 mandates the Minister of Canadian Heritage to create a national framework for sports betting advertising with “reasonable limits.” While provinces and territories can regulate gaming and betting independently, this framework aims to enhance collaboration by sharing information and establishing general standards.
Bill S-269 proposes measures to regulate advertising, including restricting non-broadcast advertising and limiting its scope. It also suggests that the federal government consider restricting or banning the use of celebrities or athletes in ads, similar to recent regulations by the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (AGCO). Deacon criticized the AGCO's rules for still allowing athletes to promote sportsbooks through responsible gambling (RG) messages, calling it a “truck-size loophole” that appeals to children.
The bill also aims to find ways to prevent minors and problem gamblers from being affected by sports betting advertising.
What Was Discussed?
The sessions included senators who had differing opinions on Bill C-218. Alberta Sen. Paula Simons, who voted against the single-sports betting bill, said, “I predicted that this would happen.” Others, like Deacon, supported the bill, believing it would bring single-sport betting under provincial jurisdiction, given its existing popularity through grey-market operators.
Quebec Sen. Leo Housakos, committee chair, expressed mixed feelings, saying, “I’m torn on if I was wise by doing so.”
The discussions highlighted the potential harm of gambling advertising, particularly to children and individuals with gambling addictions. Former Olympian Bruce Kidd, a leading member of the Campaign to Ban Advertising for Gambling, argued for a federal ban on gambling ads, calling it the most effective public health strategy.
Will Hill, executive director of the Canadian Lottery Coalition, reiterated that advertising for sportsbooks regulated only in Ontario should not be broadcast outside the province. He emphasized the need for any new regulatory framework to clearly define legal advertising boundaries.
Is a Full Ban Possible?
Some advocates have called for a complete ban on sports betting advertisements, akin to the restrictions on alcohol and tobacco advertising in Ontario. Sen. Cotter noted that while a full ban is unlikely to happen immediately, Bill S-269 could serve as an initial step towards more stringent regulations.
Deacon compared the situation to tobacco advertising, which faced restrictions only after extensive legal battles. She acknowledged that while a complete ban would be ideal, jurisdictional and constitutional issues make it impractical. “We didn’t want perfect to be the enemy of good,” she said.
What Comes Next?
Introduced in June 2023, the bill was last read in November. It must clear the Transport and Communications Committee and receive another full Senate vote before reaching the House, indicating a long legislative journey ahead.
The discussions coincided with Alberta’s efforts to reform its gaming market, drawing inspiration from Ontario. The Alberta legislature recently passed a bill affirming the provincial government’s authority to manage gaming independently, paving the way for licensed third-party operators to offer gaming services alongside the Alberta Gaming, Liquor and Cannabis Commission’s (AGLC) PlayAlberta online platform.
Sasuke12345678 Finally, some sensible limits! Protecting younger players with lower stake caps is a smart move, though I do wonder if high-stakes enthusiasts will simply migrate to less regulated platforms.
YellowKetch Great move by LeoVegas! Excited to see how this transition improves the sportsbook experience. Hope they bring better odds and more live betting options!
yellowpine I really don’t understand how the government can make these changes without proper safeguards in place. Northern Ireland already has one of the highest gambling addiction rates, and now we’re increasing the risks with higher stakes. Where’s the plan to protect vulnerable players? It feels like the government is prioritizing revenue over public health.
TheHereTom It's mind-blowing how these gambling giants rake in massive profits while their customers, often struggling with addiction, lose everything. The tax payments might be high, but what about the social impact? It’s time for tighter regulations to protect vulnerable players.
YellowThundy It's great to see Turkey taking a strong stand against illegal gambling. Ontario could definitely benefit from a similar crackdown to protect players and ensure the integrity of the gambling market.
PaulTheYouthful It's disappointing to see Virginia’s online gambling proposal shelved for further review. The state was making strides towards expanding gambling options, which could bring in significant tax revenue and provide more entertainment options for residents. Hopefully, lawmakers will reconsider sooner rather than later.
CarolThePassionate It's disappointing to see sports organizations like UFC and WWE promoting gambling so aggressively. These events should be about athleticism and entertainment, not pushing risky behaviors onto fans, especially younger ones. Where’s the responsibility?
Call Girls In Safdarjung Enclave(Delhi) ⇦ 9811611494⇦ Escorts
Interesting to see how the legislative process works with issues like this. While a full ban might be challenging due to constitutional issues, I think Bill S-269 is a good step in the right direction to regulate and control the proliferation of these ads.
This legislation could have a significant impact on how sports betting companies operate. It's crucial for the industry to adapt and find new, responsible ways to engage with consumers without over-saturating the market with ads.
Deacon makes a great point about the loophole with athletes promoting responsible gambling. It still creates a strong association between sports stars and betting, which is definitely appealing to kids. We need to close that loophole.
While I understand the need for regulation, I hope they don't go too far. Advertising is a big part of how these companies operate and contribute to the economy. Finding a balance is key.
It's about time someone took action against these ads. They are incredibly pervasive and can be very triggering for those of us struggling with gambling addiction. A national framework could really help mitigate the damage.