Regulators should be wary that setting limits on how much people can lose while gambling creates an incentive for the industry to more aggressively try to increase its customer base. This makes the ban on all gambling advertising and inducements (Section 3.1.1) all the more important. If Australian governments are serious about preventing gambling harm, they will need to bolster their efforts and take action to both reduce the pervasiveness of gambling in Australia and make gambling safer. Mandatory pre-commitment with upper limits on losses could provide that safety net (see Chapter 3).

• Use BetStop—the National Self-Exclusion RegisterTM to block yourself from all phone and online gambling providers.
• Included in these symbols are all the spoils of a successful trick or treating thanks to a range of candies such as spooky love-hearts, three.
• For those who choose to gamble, mandatory pre-commitment with maximum loss limits would ensure they no longer lose more than they can afford.
• The online and pokies pre-commitment schemes recommended in Section 3.2.1 also offer this side benefit.

It makes it harder for the industry to go after individual politicians, parties, or governments, as it has done in the past (see Chapter 2). Providers should also give warning messages to customers as their limit approaches, so it doesn’t come as a shock. The proliferation of pokies is a problem that state governments should chip away at over time, at the very least to avoid making things worse. This recent history makes Tasmania’s current pokies reforms all the more remarkable (see Box 6 in Chapter 3). Gambling is one of Australia’s most politically powerful industries, which makes gambling reform high risk politically. Chapter 4 explores how governments can ensure reforms stick, by standing up to the vested interests, rebutting their self-interested claims, and coordinating reform efforts across jurisdictions.

In Parliament on Wednesday, Ms Boothby said if people had evidence “of any real claims and you’ve got proof, then give it to the right body to investigate”. The day after the Four Corners report aired on October 7, the NT government claimed it was reviewing conflict-of-interest allegations raised against NTRWC members. In NT parliament on Tuesday night, Darwin-based independent Justine Davis called on Attorney-General Marie-Clare Boothby to refer the the territory’s Racing and Wagering Act to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee (LCAC) for scrutiny. A recent Four Corners investigation found the NTRWC meets once a month, has no full-time staff and, until last week, had not released an annual report since 1993. Sign up for our latest report releases and our newsletter straight to your inbox. The history of advertising regulation suggests that Australian sport and broadcasters will adapt (see Box 8).

Clubs can offer social connection and sport without gambling

In many communities in NSW, particularly poorer communities, it’s difficult to find a venue that doesn’t have pokies (Figure 1.4). People who gamble, their families, and the broader community pay the price. Gambling can lead to financial and mental distress, relationship breakdown, family violence, and suicide. Pokies are more common in our suburbs than post boxes, ATMs, or public toilets. And they are particularly prevalent in NSW, which has almost as many pokies as the rest of Australia combined.

Governments have failed to protect Australians from gambling harm

Interactive gambling licensing is regulated in Queensland by the Office of Liquor and Gaming Regulation (OLGR). You can also check licensed gambling providers on the Australian Communications and Media Authority website. If you don’t get a satisfactory response, you can lodge a complaint with the government agency that issued the provider’s licence—this should be displayed on the gambling provider’s website. Included in these symbols are all the spoils of a successful trick or treating thanks to a range of candies such as spooky love-hearts, three. Australian reservations and casinos the support team is highly trained and knowledgeable, or 12 and the shooter craps out. Despite not having any full-time staff, the NTRWC spent $1 million on “employee remuneration”, which a spokesperson said was used to cover the wages of its director of racing and wagering and its inspectors.

1 The window for reform is open

This report mainly focuses on reducing the harm caused by pokies and betting. Other forms of gambling can undoubtedly be harmful, but are either lower risk113 or less common,114 so receive less attention in this report. Until the 1990s.40 Even today, only a small number of countries allow high-intensity pokies outside of dedicated gambling venues (such as casinos).41 However, in Australia, only WA limits access to gaming machines in this way. The federal government should ban all gambling advertising and inducements. That would go a long way to reducing Australians’ excessive exposure to gambling.

Australian governments have historically legalised and promoted a wide range of gambling options.118 Today, governments oversee a tangled web of rules and codes for Australian gambling providers119 that leaves big holes in consumer protection. Australia’s gambling regulation is a mess and does little to reduce harm, let alone prevent it. Federal and state governments have different responsibilities, but neither are doing enough. Many past attempts to strengthen consumer protections for gambling have been thwarted by vested interests, so gambling reform is now considered very politically risky. The gambling industry will push back on these reforms by denying the problems and stoking community fears.

More importantly, the central monitoring system in NSW is only one-way (rather than two-way, as it is in other states), and a two-way system is needed for state-wide pre-commitment. While many of the implementation challenges are greater for NSW, so are the benefits. Cashless gaming is currently a major focus for NSW, and is an important part of tackling money laundering via pokies,211 but is not an essential pre-cursor for mandatory pre-commitment. Most venue-based consumer protections rely on individual staff to track gambling risk and know when and how to step in – a difficult task which staff have little incentive to undertake. Showed how effective the gambling industry is in influencing Australian politics, punching well above its weight.

For those who choose to gamble, mandatory pre-commitment with maximum loss limits would ensure they no longer lose more than they can afford. The federal government should establish a national pre-commitment system for online gambling, and state governments should roll out state-wide pre-commitment for pokies. In parallel, the federal government should investigate the feasibility of a universal system across all gambling environments. Most gamblers’ spending will be unaffected by our proposed maximum limits (Figure 4.4). The federal government spin samurai casino has responsibility for online gambling but is yet to step up and really own this role. But people still cannot consistently self-exclude from all forms of gambling.

A phased approach would give sporting bodies and broadcasters time to find replacement revenue.191 Despite alarmist claims, this would not be a fatal blow to either (Chapter 4). Governments have a responsibility to act in the public interest, even when it is politically challenging. Gambling is big business, and the industry has repeatedly used its political power to thwart efforts to better protect the public.