Andrew Rhodes confirmed as permanent UKGC boss
Andrew Rhodes has accepted the role of Chief Executive of the UK Gambling Commission, having served as interim leader of the regulator since last summer.
Appointed last June, following the resignation of former Chief Executive Neil McArthur, in light of the Commission’s regulatory failings brought to life by Football Index’s high profile administration.
The former Chief Register of the University of Swansea and senior officer for the Department for Work and Pensions, the Food Standards Agency and the DVLA had accepted the interim role on an 18-month contract.
UK media had previously reported that Rhodes was the preferred candidate to lead the Commission, having impressed Colleagues and DCMS during his first months in charge of the regulator.
During his first months in office, Rhodes had handled the Commission’s agenda of providing final insights and analysis for the government to complete its White Paper review of the 2005 Gambling Act.
Furthermore, Rhodes had overseen the Commission’s handling of the Fourth National Lottery Licence Competition won by Allwyn UK – the conglomerate that will replace Camelot Group as the operating steward of the National Lottery.
“Andrew will continue to work closely with chair Marcus Boyle, the Board of Commissioners, and the Commission’s senior leadership team to ensure Great Britain’s gambling industry is regulated strongly and effectively,” read the UKGC’s statement.
“He will also continue his stakeholder engagement programme with consumers, industry, parliamentarians and those with lived experience.”
The UKGC is led by the new leadership duo of Rhodes and Marcus Boyle as Chairman – who was appointed last September following the resignation of former incumbent Bill Moyes.
In separate addresses, Rhodes and Boyle have stated that they will oversee a tougher era of compliance for UK operators – irrespective of pending Gambling Review outcomes.
Writing an op-ed column in The Times, Boyle backed Rhodes’ leadership assessment that UK gambling had too many persistently failing operators”.
The leadership duo outlined that tougher penalties were required to ensure ‘behavioural changes’ in which operators must place accountability at the heart of their operations.