A capacity crowd of operators, regulators and industry observers gathered in London in December to discuss European igaming legislation.
A panel of legal experts and regulators from France, Italy, Malta and the UK debated the merits of the possible creation of an EU regulatory framework among the 27 EU jurisdictions versus the merits of purely state-controlled igaming regulation.
Hosted by GTECH G2 and chaired by Robin Le Prevost of the States of Alderney, the debate was both lively and insightful. “It’s clear that regulatory change will possibly be the greatest influence on shaping the online gaming sector over the next few years - this is why we decided to host this seminar on the topic of regulation.” said Leigh Nissim, commercial director, GTECH G2.
“In the current state of discussions and EU law, 27 member states have more or less 27 different conceptions of gaming and it’s just as simple as that,” said debate panelist Momtchil Monov, Associate, Ulys Law Firm.
“When you speak to the Poles, when you speak to the Bulgarians, when you speak to the French, they don’t share the same views. I would say a mutually satisfactory compromise is not that easy. Negotiations are very difficult.”
The debate posed five resolutions to a panel of pro-European legislative harmonisation representatives and then posed the same question to a panel of representatives who favour exclusivity for state-regulated gaming markets.
Depending on the panel’s view of the resolution, they had five minutes to either argue an affirmative or negative point of view on the resolution posed. This was the first time these issues had been discussed in a structured debate format.
Posing the argument in favour of state-controlled igaming legislation were Quirino Mancini and Momtchil Monov. Representing the argument for the European harmonisation and mutual recognition of igaming legislation were Dr Trevor De Giorgio, Dr Joseph Borg and Tom Lippiet.
