Ministers will now be forced to respond to the anger triggered by planned financial checks on betters.

1

They want to conduct affordability assessments on anyone who loses £125 in a month period or £500 in a year.

The sheer number of critics voicing opposition already means the government has to issue a formal response, rising to a debate in Parliament if it hits 100,000.

Yesterday we revealed fury at proposals to particularly sting those who live in poorer areas.

Julie Harrington, chief executive of the British Horseracing Authority, said: “The BHA is gravely concerned about the impact on racing’s finances of proposed affordability checks.

“While we do not want anyone to come to harm from betting on racing, blanket affordability checks are not appropriate and we are also very concerned that the Gambling Commission’s proposals to assess people’s eligibility to place a bet based on their job title or postcode is discriminatory.”

A DCMS spokesperson said: “We are reforming gambling regulation to protect people from potentially life changing losses.

“As outlined in the Gambling White Paper, these will be light-touch, frictionless checks.

“Our proposed checks are intended to remove inconsistent, onerous and ad hoc checks to streamline the process for the overwhelming majority of accounts.

“They will apply to only the very highest spenders, and there will be no new requirements on betting at the track, or at the local high street betting shop.

“Personal details such as addresses are already collected by betting companies when an individual signs up to gamble, but we have no plans to use postcode data to determine when checks are carried out.”