Andy Burnham has won the Makerfield by-election and now looks almost certain to become Britain’s seventh Prime Minister in a decade.
The former Manchester mayor has a complicated history with the gambling sector, raising significant questions about what his leadership could mean for operators.
Burnham’s previous comments about wanting to “relegate gambling sponsorship of sport to the history books” have caused concern among industry advocates watching his rise closely.
He also appeared at the 2025 APPG on Gambling Harm, where he criticised adult gaming centres, signalling a harder line than many in the sector had hoped for.
Regulatory analyst Dan Waugh of Regulus Partners told NEXT.io that Burnham was once considered “reasonably balanced” during his time leading the Department for Culture, Media and Sport under Gordon Brown.
However, Waugh noted that Burnham’s time in Manchester saw him become increasingly aligned with the anti-gambling movement, including through the Greater Manchester Combined Authority’s ties to Gambling with Lives’ sister organisations.
The GMCA’s “Odds Are: They Win” campaign has drawn criticism from parts of the industry, with some accusing it of taking an overtly anti-gambling stance.
Waugh summarised his assessment plainly, telling NEXT.io: “On the face of it, Andy Burnham seems far less liberal than his predecessor – and more likely to be sympathetic to arguments for suppression of the licensed market.”
Will Prochaska, director of the Coalition to End Gambling Ads, took an opposing view, telling NEXT.io he was optimistic about what a Burnham premiership could deliver for reform campaigners.
Prochaska said: “I wouldn’t be surprised if that were to change under a Burnham government,” referring to what he described as the current administration’s desire to grow gambling revenue.
Prochaska also pointed to Burnham’s own words at a gambling reform APPG, quoting him as acknowledging he was once more supportive of the sector than he is now.
He added: “I’m perfectly comfortable with his record on this topic,” reflecting a confidence among reform advocates that Burnham represents a genuine shift in political direction.
The Betting and Gaming Council offered a measured response, congratulating Burnham on his by-election win and noting the regulated industry contributes £6.8bn to the UK economy, generates £4bn in tax and supports 109,000 jobs.
The BGC emphasised that policy affecting the sector should remain “evidence-led, proportionate and supports investment, jobs and consumer protections” as the government pursues its growth agenda.
One major listed operator, speaking anonymously to NEXT.io, struck a cautious tone, saying: “The devil will be in the detail – it always is on this stuff.”
The question of a gambling advertising ban sits at the centre of industry concerns, with Waugh and Prochaska disagreeing on the legal mechanism available to a new government.
Prochaska argued the Gambling Act gives the secretary of state broad powers over advertising, calling it “an easy one” for any incoming administration determined to act.
Waugh disputed that characterisation, arguing those powers are not broad enough to facilitate heavy clampdowns and that parliamentary time could be a genuine obstacle.
Waugh did acknowledge a ban could serve Burnham politically, describing it as “quick and easy when you compare it to some of the other major policy decisions” such as utility renationalisation.
He also cautioned that opening the door to gambling ad restrictions could invite pressure for controls across a much wider range of goods and services well beyond the betting sector.
