Broken - By design.

Before reading this, I would like to apologise to you all. I am aware this conflict is hurtful to many, and for my part I am deeply sorry. I take no pride, nor happiness in what is going on, nor do I wish to further any pain, but I believe it is so incredibly important for those that commit their lives to helping people through Gambling Harm to be proud of what they do, and now allow dangerous narratives that seek to divide us to prevail. Be proud, and never lose sight of why we do what we do.

That out of the way -

As many of you will be aware, in March, Lucy Powell MP for Manchester Central wrote to Andy Burnham the Mayor of Manchester highlighting the concerns many of us have around the Greater Manchester Combined Authority's Chapter - One website.

Unfortunately, throughout months of communications with the Mayor and his team, the GMCA have refused to remove the dangerous and divisive Caveat placed solely on the National Gambling Helpline operated by Gamcare. The National Gambling Helpline has been at the front line of prevention and support for as long as any of us can remember. The people at the end of those phones have prevented suicide, prevented crime, impact on affected others and most of all, supported hundreds of thousands of people into recovery from Gambling Addiction. After receiving many complaints, the GMCA did find that the Caveat needed to be changed, however the change was beyond minimal, and potentially even worse.

The National Gambling Helpline is funded by Gambleaware, an independent charity that commissions work to help people, and Gambleaware are funded by LCCP RET, the funding system set up by the UK government and Gambling commission to provide Research, Education and Treatment. Gambleaware are robustly independent from industry, as proven by the recent investigation by the Charity Regulator.

I have written extensively around the impact of the dangerous caveats placed upon the helpline by the Chapter - One website, and the potential for it to directly contribute to Gambling related suicide and create wrongful and dangerous mistrust in RET organisations, so I will not do that here (if interested - https://www.dhirubhai.net/posts/jordan-lea-6160391b9_the-national-gambling-helpline-operated-activity-7171825899196125184-PPlK?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop)

It is regretful, that the communications over the past 5 months could not resolve the situation. It is more concerning to me though - that the GMCA is using the OHID recommendations as it's reasoning for the caveat.

Fundamentally, all RET organisations are completely transparent about the funding model. Gambleaware include all donations on their website each year. It is not for any one provider to play god with service, especially where these actions may contribute to serious harm on the population in order to fight a political funding fight. It is MORE concerning however, that the OHID are rumoured by be front runners for the prevention commissioner job. To make my point clear, the body potentially in charge of commissioning the future funds for prevention is being used as an attack dog to hurt RET organisations, and prevent the GMCA from being held accountable for political posturing and framing current providers as evil industry funded monsters.

It is with deep regret, and after many months of attempting to mediate the removal of the Caveat and facilitate better relationships for all organisations, we have come to a fork in the road. Take the path of least resistance, accept it is what it is and we're all fine to be beaten over the head with a stick, or fight for what I believe in.

After much consideration, and as an absolute last resort, I have decided to formally take legal action against the GMCA.

This is on the basis that the GMCA has included dangerous Caveats for one Gambleaware funded programme The National Gambling Helpline, however has not placed the same Caveats on other projects that Gambling with lives (advisors and partners on Chapter - One) are favourable too, EG - Gamban which is heavily, and rightly promoted on the website.

The Chapter - One promotes non clinical support services for two organisations Gambling with Lives are favourable too, but not the NGSN that provide the same or similar services. Notably, it states there are no services or provisions in Wales, however there are at least 4 organisations providing support services, including ARA, Adferiad, Deal Me Out and Gamcare. It is inconceivable that the GMCA would inform their service users and stakeholders that there is NO service provision in Wales, whilst knowing this is not the case.

I would like to take this opportunity to say, Gamban and the non clinical services listed on Chapter - One, like GamFam and GamLearn are exceptional services, that are rightly held in high regard by all. They have done nothing to face any criticism. But all services should be held to the same standard, and vice versa. You cannot, and should not play games with service provision. The lives of service users are just too important. Where there are services, we should sign post. The DCMS itself has stated there is a 'No wrong door policy'. This behaviour shown by the GMCA is entirely the opposite to that policy.

Based on these two examples, we can evidence that the GMCA has not been fair and open, and has discriminated against one side for the other. We believe this has been done deliberately to cause detrimental harm to the RET sector as a whole, and provide a gut punch of damage at a time where a Levy is being commissioned. We believe the GMCA has acted unlawfully and a manner that has brought itself into disrepute, acting with severely libellous behaviours.

It is my hope, that upon receiving the legal action, the GMCA will remove the Caveat, however if it does not, we will be requesting

• Full written apology co commissioned by the GMCA and Gambling with Lives to all stakeholders and people with lived experience impacted by the Caveat.
• Full removal of the Caveat including on the National Gambling Helpline
• Payment of legal costs
• A charitable donation to a RET organisation of choice made by both the GMCA and Gambling with Lives.

I am begging with the GMCA to remove the Caveat upon receipt of the letter from our legal representatives.

I will not at this stage be any more specific about any aspect of the case or the evidence collated, however I will share a letter received by Andy Burnham in response to the complaint.