Former MP criticizes Canada’s sports betting rollout
A former federal lawmaker who led efforts to legalize single-event sports betting in Canada says the policy has led to outcomes he didn’t expect, including more advertising and market expansion.
Brian Masse, a former New Democratic Party MP, initially introduced legislation in 2019 to end the federal ban on single-event sports betting. The measure was later reintroduced and passed with cross-party support in 2021, amending the Criminal Code to allow provinces to regulate it.
Masse said the law was supposed to modernize the industry, protect jobs, and shift betting away from illegal markets into a regulated system. However, in an interview with CBC News, he said that the way some provinces have implemented legalization is concerning.
“It’s deplorable the way that some of the provinces have actually implemented it. They’ve allowed the private sector to basically own and operate,” he said. “I don’t have regrets, but it’s sad to see some of the repercussions.”
Since legalization, Ontario has opened its market to private companies, licensed dozens of operators, and the industry has grown into a multibillion-dollar market. It has also led to an increase in advertising during sports broadcasts.
A 2024 CBC Marketplace report found that gambling content accounted for around 21% of Ontario sports shows. The Canadian Medical Association has also reported a 300% increase in young men contacting mental health helplines for gambling-related support.
Masse and other observers say the law left key regulatory decisions to the provinces, leading to mixed approaches. Legislative efforts to introduce national advertising standards are currently under consideration in Parliament.
Charlotte Capewell brings her passion for storytelling and expertise in writing, researching, and the gambling industry to every article she writes. Her specialties include the US gambling industry, regulator legislation, igaming, and more.
Verticals:
Sectors:
Topics:
Dig Deeper
Related stories
The Backstory
How we got here
Canada’s rapid move to legalize single-event sports betting in 2021 reshaped a gray market into a provincially regulated industry, with Ontario opening the door to dozens of private operators and billions in wagers. That momentum is now colliding with a public backlash over ubiquitous ads and rising harm signals, setting up a second phase of policymaking focused on marketing rules and consumer protection. The former lawmaker who pushed to modernize the Criminal Code says the implementation diverged from intent, highlighting a core tension in Canada’s model: provinces hold the reins, yet the consequences of their choices — from marketing intensity to youth exposure — are national in scale.
This backstory traces how other jurisdictions’ missteps, stalled reforms and cautionary pauses are shaping Canada’s debate over how far to rein in a fast-growing industry without pushing bettors back to illegal markets.
Provincial freedom, national consequences
The federal change enabling single-event wagers left crucial decisions — who can operate, how to advertise, how to intervene on harm — to the provinces. Ontario’s open licensing made it a magnet for sportsbook brands and ad spend, but the uneven landscape across Canada has fueled calls for consistent national standards on marketing and responsible gambling. Lawmakers are weighing whether a countrywide framework is needed to curb saturation advertising, set age-appropriate guardrails and standardize helplines and disclaimers across channels.
The political split over how to proceed is evident within Alberta. While a national coalition has pressed for a ban on online sports betting promotions, an Alberta cabinet minister has warned that sweeping prohibitions could weaken the legal market and strengthen unlicensed rivals. In one account of the growing rift, an Alberta senator joined a push to ban sports betting ads, arguing that relentless marketing risks normalizing gambling for young people and vulnerable groups. The province’s red tape minister countered that “coming down on the good guys” would undercut licensed operators’ ability to compete with offshore sites, underscoring a central policy trade-off now animating federal discussions.
U.S. oversight offers a warning
Early lessons from the United States show how gaps in ad governance can harden into public health problems and political headaches. An audit criticized the Massachusetts Gaming Commission over betting ads, finding failures to review campaigns before they aired during the critical first months of legal online wagering. State auditors reported that 17 ads lacked the required problem-gambling helpline and documented 51 instances of marketing sent to people younger than 21 or those with gambling addictions. Regulators also struggled to document staff training for helping at-risk patrons, according to the report.
Massachusetts officials say they are implementing fixes, including hiring an independent auditor to review operator compliance. But the episode illustrates the costs of a reactive approach: once ads saturate screens and social feeds, reining them in becomes politically and operationally harder. For Canadian lawmakers probing whether to mandate national ad standards, the Massachusetts experience bolsters arguments for clearer upfront rules, dedicated monitoring and meaningful penalties for violations.
Australia’s debate shows the politics of delay
Australia — long a bellwether for wagering policy — is wrestling with the same collision of commercial interests and public health. After a year of high-profile matches awash in promotions, a former chief executive at one of the country’s biggest gambling companies urged the government to move faster and further. In an op-ed after the AFL’s most-watched event of the year, he decried an “invasion” of betting spots around the Grand Final and called for stronger curbs on timing and placement. Coverage of his critique captured the rising impatience among reform advocates; a summary noted how the former Tabcorp executive pressed Canberra to restrict gambling ads and questioned why promised reforms had stalled.
Pressure intensified as prominent athletes weighed in. Australian Test cricketer Usman Khawaja told crossbench MPs and public health experts that the link between wagering and sport is “scary” for kids, urging an immediate advertising ban to break the association. Reporting on the push highlighted how Khawaja criticized delays on a gambling ad ban and backed a bipartisan plan to phase in a prohibition over three years. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has argued that an outright ban would be hard to enforce and could deprive sports and media of funding, a stance that mirrors concerns voiced by some Canadian officials. The Australian debate underscores how political caution can extend timelines, even as public sentiment turns.
Elsewhere, regulators tap the brakes
Some markets are choosing to slow-roll legalization to avoid the whiplash of overexposure and underprepared oversight. Uzbekistan legalized online wagering in 2024 but has yet to issue a single license, with officials citing the need to complete a Unified State Registry to track bets and player identities. Authorities say the platform is technically ready but will launch only after additional safeguards are in place. In a sign of their prevention-first posture, Uzbekistan delayed the rollout of online gambling licenses while drafting rules on capital, reserves and restricted participants, along with penalties for breaches.
The contrast with liberalized markets is stark: rather than open first and regulate later, Tashkent is sequencing infrastructure and enforcement before switching on commercial activity. For Canadian policymakers considering national ad rules or a centralized registry of self-exclusions, the Uzbek approach offers a template for building compliance capacity before exposure scales up.
What’s at stake for Canada
The stakes are financial, political and social. Provinces that rely on wagering tax receipts and broadcast partners accustomed to ad revenue warn that blanket bans could push consumers to offshore sites and erode funding for sports. Advocates counter that saturation marketing drives risky behavior, citing surges in helpline contacts among young men since legalization and the difficulty of insulating minors from omnipresent odds and celebrity endorsements.
The debate is narrowing to a few leverage points Ottawa could influence even with provincial control intact: national advertising standards with clearer blackout periods and youth protections; consistent, prominent harm-reduction messaging; unified self-exclusion and data reporting; and enforcement mechanisms with teeth. Lawmakers already exploring such measures are taking cues from missteps abroad and pressure at home, including the growing coalition calling for a ban on sports betting ads and the pushback from provincial officials worried about unintended consequences.
Canada’s first act of sports betting reform expanded a legal market. The second will determine whether that market can operate without hardening social costs — and whether regulators can get ahead of problems before political will gives way to another cycle of delay.
