Senator Marty Deacon from the Senate of Canada guides us through Bill S-269, National Framework on Advertising for Sports Betting Act
Concerning Bill S-269, National Framework on Advertising for Sports Betting Act, what does this act establish for the regulation of sports betting advertising in Canada and setting national guidelines for risk prevention for affected individuals?
Since it is a framework bill, it is somewhat open-ended. What we are left with would be the result of government consultations with provinces, the industry, mental health experts, and other stakeholders. However, it would mean a set of guidelines and protection in these ads that every Canadian could expect, regardless of what province they live in, as exists for industries like alcohol and tobacco.
Why does the Canadian Parliament acknowledge the need for a consistent approach to reduce the harm caused by promoting gambling to minors and vulnerable individuals?
If this bill passes, it would be an acknowledgment by Parliament that we need consistent advertising standards from province to province around single sports betting advertising. If a patchwork of regulations is allowed to grow, the level of protection for every Canadian would only rise to the jurisdiction with the weakest set of regulations. We’ve seen this already with Ontario; it is the only province where betting with private betting companies is legal. And yet, Canadians from coast to coast are bombarded with ads for companies they can’t legally bet with. As other provinces privatize, which looks inevitable, they will set up their own set of regulations around advertising.
But as we’ve seen, broadcasting and advertising care little for provincial boundaries and jurisdiction. Advertisers would flock to the jurisdiction with the weakest set of regulations, knowing that they will spill out anyway. This is unfair to Canadians, and it is unfair to provinces that want to regulate more. That’s why we need a national standard across the board.
With a growing concern, especially regarding young people, could the bill establish standards like those used to regulate tobacco and alcohol advertising?
A full on ban like that on tobacco advertising would be difficult. While nothing is stopping the government from pursuing this route, it would engage Charter Rights around freedoms of speech. Limitations of Charter rights are considered constitutional if they constitute reasonable limits justifiable in a just and democratic society, also known as a Section 1 analyses. Courts have upheld restrictions on the promotion of tobacco because they considered it a reasonable limitation given the demonstrably severe harm caused by tobacco consumption and the fact that limiting the promotion
of tobacco products was considered to be a rational measure which could help reduce such harm. That, however, took decades of work and court battles, and I’m not sure courts would conclude gambling harms rise to the level of those presented by tobacco use.
We do, however, have some national standards and limitations in the advertising of alcohol in the CRTC’s “Code for broadcast advertising of alcoholic beverages.” I believe gambling and the harms presented by them rise to the level of alcohol, particularly for young people, so I would expect a similar standard to be set.
While the second reading by the Senate was on May 9th, 2024, why must the Minister of Canadian Heritage develop a national framework on the advertising of sports betting?
We went with a framework bill because there is little avenue to do this on our own as single legislators. We cannot outright ban the advertising. There are jurisdictional pieces at play that involve the provinces as well. That is beyond my capacity. The government, however, can take a leadership role and work with the provinces on this, as they have done with a number of different cross-jurisdictional issues. The Minister of Heritage was chosen because the CRTC falls under their portfolio, so it seemed like a natural fit.
Why does the Minister need to consider regulating sports betting advertising in Canada, such as by restricting or prohibiting the involvement of celebrities and athletes?
Single sports betting in Canada is relatively new. In the three years since it was legalized, Canadians have called for something to be done about the amount of advertising we are seeing around this. We’ve seen the damage done by this in other countries. In 2005, the UK legalized single sports betting, and like us, placed little to no restrictions on advertising. Today, as a result, it is estimated that a third of a million people in the UK are problem gamblers, and 55,000 of them are children. For each problem gambler, it’s been found that six other people suffer some form of collateral damage, such as the breakup of families, crime, loss of employment, or loss of homes. Tragically, on average, a problem gambler commits suicide every day.
Recognizing the scale of this problem, the UK is beginning to correct its course. Last year, they banned celebrities and athletes from appearing in gambling ads. Gambling ads will not air until after 9 pm, and no longer will they see betting companies adorning the jersey of their favourite footballer. It is not just the UK that is taking such measures, though. Italy, Spain, Poland, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands have all recently introduced strict regulations on gambling advertising, some banning ads entirely. We owe it to Canadians not to wait until such damage is done to finally do something. We know where this is going. It’s foolish to wait for these harms to happen before pulling in gambling promotion. With the benefit of foresight, we can do this now, and prevent lives from being ruined.
