BAGO raises the alarm over illegal gambling in light of Sciensano’s figures

Sciensano’s latest figures on gambling in Belgium show that risky gambling patterns have remained stable for over five years. For BAGO, these figures confirm above all the need for a more coherent public policy, focused on illegal gambling, player protection and the effective enforcement of rules.

Figures that reignite a sensitive debate

According to Sciensano’s latest Health Survey, the prevalence of risky gambling behaviour has remained stable for over five years. It stands at 2.6% of the Belgian population. Among gamblers, 0.6% are at high risk of developing problematic behaviour.

In a market comprising lotteries, betting, casinos, gaming halls, licensed sites and illegal operators, interpreting the figures requires precision. Nine out of ten Belgian gamblers participate in lottery games. This data is central to BAGO’s analysis, as it highlights differences in treatment between various categories of operators. For the association, it is important to examine who is subject to restrictions, who is exempt, and who operates outside any controllable framework.

Real but fragmented exposure to advertising

The Health Survey also highlights the population’s exposure to advertising and sponsorship relating to gambling, betting and lotteries. 52.2% of the population report being exposed to at least one form of gambling advertising every week. This exposure occurs primarily via television, websites or social media.

BAGO emphasises one point: this exposure cannot automatically be attributed solely to licensed private operators. The survey does not distinguish between legal and illegal market offerings. It therefore does not, on its own, allow for the precise identification of the source of all the advertisements viewed by respondents.

Sponsorship, too, presents a more nuanced picture. Around one in ten Belgians report frequent exposure to gambling-related sponsorship. Conversely, four in ten Belgians say they are exposed to it little or not at all. Exposure takes place within a fragmented advertising landscape, where several channels overlap.

Television, sport and sports media coverage remain the dominant touchpoints for sponsorship. Social media and influencers are also playing an increasing role. This development makes monitoring more complex, particularly when certain messages come from unauthorised parties or digital channels that are difficult to regulate.

Men and younger age groups report higher exposure than women and older age groups. This finding is consistent with international observations on advertising reach and the use of digital platforms. It also highlights the need for a policy that takes into account the audiences that are actually exposed, rather than general measures whose effectiveness may remain limited.

Belgium’s regulatory framework is among the strictest in Europe

To understand Sciensano’s figures, they must be viewed within the current legal framework. Since 1 July 2023, Belgium has applied one of the strictest regimes in Europe regarding gambling advertising.

For licensed private operators, advertising is now prohibited on television, radio, in newspapers and magazines, on social media, and via post, email or text message. Limited exceptions remain possible, for example in the operators’ own retail outlets, on the operator’s website or, subject to conditions, through certain targeted adverts on search engines.

This strictness places licensed operators in a highly regulated environment. Whilst it serves a protective purpose, it also has a consequence that BAGO finds worrying: the visibility of the legal offering may diminish to the benefit of less regulated, or even entirely illegal, operators.

The visibility of regulated gambling services is not merely a commercial issue. It is also a matter of player protection. Within a legal framework, mechanisms are in place: age verification, self-exclusion schemes, limits, monitoring, a duty of care, and oversight by the relevant authorities. These tools can only be applied effectively if players turn to recognised and regulated services.

What BAGO is asking of policymakers

For BAGO, the figures from Sciensano call for a targeted, coherent and genuinely enforceable policy. The association considers that exposure to advertising and sponsorship linked to gambling remains a social reality, but that it does not stem exclusively from licensed private operators.

It identifies three priorities: stepping up the fight against illegal operators, ensuring consistent advertising rules for all gambling products, and maintaining clear visibility of the licensed offering. 

BAGO also advocates for the strengthening of the Gaming Commission. The aim is to enable it to act more effectively against illegal operators. This request is part of an approach focused on enforcing the rules rather than simply imposing further bans.

A protection policy cannot ignore the source of the risk

Sciensano’s figures confirm a complex reality. Problem gambling exists, but its prevalence remains stable at 2.6%. Advertising exposure also exists, with more than half the population reporting exposure to at least one form of gambling-related advertising every week. But this exposure stems from a diverse environment, involving a mix of lotteries, sponsorship, sports channels, social media, licensed operators and illegal operators.

It is precisely this complexity that makes the political debate a delicate one. A measure may appear protective on paper, yet produce the opposite effect if it reduces the visibility of regulated offerings and leaves more room for unregulated operators.