Gambling Policy In Australia

Downloads

Responsible gambling is largely implemented via codes of practice, required in all Australian casinos, pubs and clubs and many other jurisdictions. These require gambling operators to provide. Conclusions Gambling in Australia provides a curious paradox. Highly liberalized State government policies that allow the proliferation of high intensity gambling coexist with extensive policy, regulation and research designed to address the negative impact of gambling on the Australian community. There is no single overarching statute regulating gambling activities in Australia, nor is there a single overarching gambling authority. Instead, gambling in Australia is regulated at both the State/Territory and Federal level. Gambling policy in Australia has traditionally been the responsibility of the States rather than the Commonwealth. State and territory governments regulate and provide gambling services and rely heavily on the ensuing revenue. However, recent developments have seen the Commonwealth take a more active role in this area.

Gambling Policy In Australia Travel

Downloads per month over past year

Abstract

The paper will discuss current gambling policy in Australia. The attraction of the use of gambling as a method of “painless taxation” is recognised, but its potentiality for damaging individuals and society will be considered. Five policy options are identified. Much evidence will be drawn from the 3-volume report Australia's Gambling Industries, and there will be an evaluation of the Australian Interactive Gambling Act, 2001. The assessment of the least damaging form of gambling policy when all aspects of gambling are taken into account, is the ultimate aim of this paper.

Actions (login required)

These divisions relate to the policy “for increasing restrictions on gambling”.Compare how a supporter of the policy would have voted to the division outcome.

29th Jul 2019, 4:03 PM – SenateMotions - Gambling - A new inquiry - Division No. 5

The majority voted against a motion introduced by SA Senator Stirling Griff (Centre Alliance), which means it failed.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) this month marks the 25th anniversary since the introduction of poker machines in pubs and clubs in South Australia,

(ii) despite numerous recommendations by the Commonwealth Productivity Commission (PC) and other inquiries, there has been no meaningful poker machine reform in terms of harm minimisation,

(iii) according to the PC's 2010 report into gambling, 15% of regular poker machine players are so-called 'problem gamblers' with approximately 40-60% of spending on poker machines coming from 'problem gamblers',

(iv) the PC's 2010 report highlighted the significant social cost of gambling–estimated at that time to be at least $4 billion,

(v) despite having only 0.3% of the world's population, Australia reportedly has 6% of the world's conventional gaming machines and 18% of its poker machines, and

(vi) Australians lose approximately $24 billion per year on gambling, a figure which is more than any other nation; and

(b) calls on the Federal Government to:

(i) recognise the ongoing harm gambling causes, which varies from emotional to financial costs, and commit to meaningful harm minimisation, and

(ii) instruct the Commonwealth Productivity Commission to conduct a new inquiry to provide an updated perspective on gambling and propose relevant recommendations.

13th Feb 2019, 4:20 PM – SenateMotions - Gambling - Introduced restrictions - Division No. 10

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Qld Senator Larissa Waters, which means it failed.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) the gambling industry donated almost $3 million dollars to the Liberal, Labor and Australian Conservatives political parties in 2017-18,

(ii) these donations came from sports betting companies, casinos and poker machine operators,

(iii) the Australian Hotels Association was the second largest political donor in the country for the 2017-18 year, with declared political gifts leaping from $153,000 in 2016-17 to $1.1 million last financial year,

(iv) Australia has the world's worst per-capita gambling losses of $1,000 a head,

(v) there are at least 115,000 Australians at the moment who are directly and seriously harmed by gambling, and another 280,000 experiencing significant risk,

(vi) for every person directly harmed by gambling, between 5 and 10 friends, family and others, including employers, are also affected – this means that up to 5 million Australians could be negatively affected,

(vii) online wagering is the fastest growing gambling segment, with over $1.4 billion gambled online each year,

(viii) pokies cause the most harm, with three out of four people being harmed by gambling, principally using poker machines, and

(ix) enormous donations from the gambling lobby to the major political parties has resulted in consecutive Australian governments failing to support harm-minimisation reforms that would help protect people from predatory gambling; and

(b) calls on the Federal Government to:

(i) ban corporate donations from the gambling industry,

(ii) introduce evidence-based harm-minimisation and product safety measures to reduce the development of problem gambling, and to assist gamblers to limit their expenditure,

(iii) phase out poker machines, and, in the meantime, implement $1 maximum bets per spin, $20 machine load-up limits, and $500 jackpot limits, and mandatory pre-commitment for pokies and sports betting, and

(iv) ban sports betting advertisements during the broadcast of sporting events and children's viewing times.

27th Mar 2018, 12:06 PM – SenateCommunications Legislation Amendment (Online Content Services and Other Measures) Bill 2017 - in Committee - Gambling ads - Division No. 1

The majority voted against the amendments moved by Nick Xenophon Senator Stirling Griff, which means they failed.

Amendment text

Senator Griff explained that his amendments:

'These amendments fit within the regulatory framework proposed by the government in the bill and have the effect of a prohibition on all gambling ads during the hours of 5 am to 8.30 pm during G-rated programs and any live sporting events across platforms, regardless of whether the event is live or not. In instances where a sporting event has started but not finished before 8.30 pm, the NXT amendments will also extend the prohibition of gambling ads to 30 minutes after the conclusion of the sporting event.'

Main idea of the bill

The bill was introduced to:

• enable the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) to make online content service provider rules which impose gambling promotions restrictions on online content service providers;
• provide the ACMA with the power to determine program standards about gambling promotional content which apply to certain broadcasters and subscriptions providers; and
• require the ACMA to monitor compliance with online content service provider rules.

26th Mar 2018, 8:51 PM – SenateCommunications Legislation Amendment (Online Content Services and Other Measures) Bill 2017 - Second Reading - Prohibit betting on lottery outcome - Division No. 3

The majority voted in favour of an amendment to the usual second reading motion ('That this bill be read a second time').

Reading a bill for a second time is parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill.

Amendment text

At the end of the motion, add:

', but the Senate is of the opinion that the Government should legislate to prohibit betting on the outcome of a lottery.'

Main idea of the bill

The bill was introduced to:

• enable the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) to make online content service provider rules which impose gambling promotions restrictions on online content service providers;
• provide the ACMA with the power to determine program standards about gambling promotional content which apply to certain broadcasters and subscriptions providers; and
• require the ACMA to monitor compliance with online content service provider rules.

14th Feb 2018, 4:15 PM – SenateMotions - Gambling - Phase out poker machines - Division No. 8

The majority voted against this motion, which means it failed.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) Australia is home to 0.3 per cent of the world's population, but 18 per cent of the world's poker machines,

(ii) Australians lose more money to poker machines than anywhere else in the world per capita,

(iii) most countries around the world, 226 out of 238, have no poker machines in pubs and clubs,

(iv) a 2010 study by the Productivity Commission found that problem gamblers account for 40 per cent of losses on poker machines,

(v) suicide rates among problem gamblers are twice the rate of other addictions, and

(vi) problem gamblers are far more vulnerable to depression, relationships breakdown, job loss, lowered work productivity, bankruptcy and crime;

(b) acknowledges that:

(i) poker machines have caused a significant degree of social and economic dislocation in the community, and

(ii) the regulation of poker machines is a litmus test of good government; and

(c) calls on the Government to support states in phasing out poker machines in pubs, because the fewer poker machines, the better.

29th Mar 2017, 4:24 PM – SenateMotions - Gambling - Apply the National Consumer Protection Framework - Division No. 7

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Nick Xenophon Team Skye Kakoschke-Moore that called for 'the Government to develop and apply the National Consumer Protection Framework to land-based betting, as well as online gambling', which means the motion failed.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) the National Consumer Protection Framework, in relation to interactive gambling, is currently being developed,

(ii) Commonwealth, state and territory gambling ministers are meeting regarding the Framework on 31 March 2017,

(iii) the Framework is being developed as a response to the O'Farrell Review and that gaming ministers are aiming to develop a better harm–minimisation strategy around online services,

(iv) currently, harm–minimisation strategies are a matter for states and territories, despite the Interactive Gambling Act 2001 (Cth) (IGA) regulating electronic gambling,

(v) there is no national gambling regulator and the Nick Xenophon Team's amendment to the Interactive Gambling Amendment Bill 2016, to establish a national regulator, was rejected by the Government,

(vi) the Framework will not apply to land-based betting,

(vii) land-based betting includes electronic betting terminals (EBTs) which are permitted under the IGA but harm–minimisation strategies are regulated by states and territories,

(viii) statistics show at least 400,000 Australians either have a significant gambling addiction or are showing signs of developing a problem – the Productivity Commission has also stated that every problem gambler impacts on average on seven other people, and

(ix) the harm caused by gambling, such as financial hardship, relationship breakdown and emotional harm is the same, regardless of what form of gambling the harm arises from; and

(b) calls on the Government to develop and apply the National Consumer Protection Framework to land-based betting, as well as online gambling.

8th Feb 2017, 5:11 PM – RepresentativesInteractive Gambling Amendment Bill 2016 - Second Reading - Phase out ads relating to betting or gambling - Division No. 3

The majority voted against a motion, which means it was unsuccessful.

It was introduced by Labor MP Julie Collins (Franklin)

Motion text

That all the words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

'whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House calls on the Government to work with the broadcasting industry and national sporting organisations on a transition plan to phase out the promotion of betting odds and commercials relating to betting or gambling before and during live sporting broadcasts, with a view to their prohibition'.

12th Sep 2016, 3:59 PM – SenateMotions - Gambling - Against gambling advertising - Division No. 4

The majority voted against a motion, which means it was unsuccessful.

The motion was introduced by Nick Xenophon Team Senator Stirling Griff. It asked for gambling advertising to be banned during children's viewing times and to be reduced on SBS.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) more than $800 million was lost by Australians on legal sports betting in the 2014-15 financial year, an increase of more than 30 per cent from 2013-14,

(ii) while some restrictions on gambling advertising exist, there is an exemption that allows gambling advertising during televised sporting events at children's viewing times,

(iii) research shows that children are especially susceptible to such advertising, and

(iv) there is a pressing need to ban gambling advertising particularly during children's viewing times;

(b) calls on the Government to amend the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 to ban gambling advertising during sporting broadcasts during children's viewing times; and

(c) further notes community concern about the recent increased level of gambling advertising on the Special Broadcasting Service, and calls on the Minister for Communications to issue a directive under section 11 of the Special Broadcasting Service Act 1991 to limit the amount of such advertising.

22nd Sep 2014, 6:08 PM – SenateOmnibus Repeal Day (Autumn 2014) Bill 2014 - in Committee - Interactive Gambling Act and ACMA - Division No. 4

The majority voted in favour of a motion that items 17 to 23 of schedule 2 'stand as printed', which means that they remain unchanged. These items relate to the Interactive Gambling Act 2001 and the discretion of the Australian Communications and Media Authority ('ACMA').

This motion was put in response to an amendment introduced by Independent Senator Nick Xenophon that those items should be opposed. Senator Xenophon explained that he was concerned that '[t]his omnibus bill, under the pretext of ensuring less red tape, will actually ... make it less likely that there will be an investigation into breaches of the Interactive Gambling Act by ACMA' (see Senator Xenophon' full explanation here).

Background to the bill

The bill was introduced to 'reduce regulatory burden for business, individuals and the community sector' (see the explanatory memorandum) and to repeal redundant provisions that are either duplications or have ceased to have effect. The provisions of the bill that make material changes have been identified and discussed in the bills digest.

5th Mar 2014, 12:27 PM – SenateSocial Services and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2013 — In Committee — Keep schedule 1 (on gambling) unchanged - Division No. 1

The majority voted in favour of a motion that schedule 1 stand as printed.(The wording of schedule 1 is available here under the heading 'Text of bill'. ) In other words, the majority wanted the schedule to remain unchanged. The motion was put in response to a Green amendment to oppose that schedule.

Schedule 1: 'repeals the position and functions of the National Gambling Regulator, along with provisions relating to the supervisory and gaming machine regulation levies, the automatic teller machine withdrawal limit, dynamic warning messages on gaming machines, the trial of mandatory pre-commitment, and matters for Productivity Commission review'.(Read more about Schedule 1 in the revised explanatory memorandum. )

Because the majority wanted the schedule to remain unchanged, this Greens amendment was rejected.

Background to the bill

The bill was introduced to make a number of key changes. These include:

Gambling Policy In Australia Immigration

• amending the National Gambling Reform Act 2012 to implement parts of the Government’s responsible gambling policy;
• amending the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 so that the income management aspect of the Cape York Welfare Reform initiative can continue for a further two years;
• amending the A New Tax System (Family Assistance) Act 1999 and the A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999 so that Family Tax Benefit Part A can only be paid up to the end of the calendar year in which a teenager is completing senior secondary school.(Read more about these measures in the bills digest.)

There are several other measures introduced by this bill that can be explored in its bills digest.

Most of the measures are savings measures that had been announced by the previous Labor Government in the 2013–14 Budget, the 2012–13 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook (MYEFO) or the 2012–13 Budget. However, the gambling reform measures, the Cape York Welfare Reform measures and the changes to Paid Parental Leave arrangements(Read about the changes to Paid Parental Leave arrangements in the bills digest.) are newly proposed by the current Government.

29th Nov 2012, 1:55 PM – RepresentativesNational Gambling Reform Bill 2012 - Consideration in Detail - Agree to the bill - Division No. 5

The majority voted in favour of a motion that this bill, as amended, be agreed to. This means that the majority agree with the bill, as it has been amended, and that they can now decide on whether to pass the bill in the House of Representatives.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through here. )

Background to the bill

The National Gambling Reform Bill 2012 was introduced along with the National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 1) 2012 and the National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 2) 2012. Together, these bills relate to a national scheme for gaming machines in order to reduce the harms associated with gambling on these machines.

According to the bills digest, these bills introduce the following:

• from the end of 2013, new electronic gaming machines ('EGMs') either manufactured in, or imported into, Australia be capable of supporting an approved precommitment system
• by 2016, EGMs be linked together as part of a state-wide or territory-wide precommitment system, and display electronic warning messages (with extended timelines for smaller venues) and
• from 1 May 2013 Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) located in gaming venues have a $250 daily withdrawal limit.(Read more about the bills in the bills digest of the National Gambling Reform Bill 2012.

)

Precommitment involves a gambler setting a loss limit before they commence playing. Independent MP Andrew Wilkie made the introduction of mandatory precommitment a key part of his agreement to support the minority Gillard Labor Government after the 2010 election.(Read more about Mr Wilkie's commitment to introducing precommitment here. ) Although the Labor Government originally agreed to introduce mandatory precommitment, these bills limit the reforms to ensuring the EGMs have precommitment capability.(Read more about the change in the Labor Government's approach to gambling reform on ABC News here.) There will also be a mandatory precommitment trial, to test its feasibility.

29th Nov 2012, 1:24 PM – RepresentativesNational Gambling Reform Bill 2012 — Second Reading — Read a second time - Division No. 3

The majority voted in favour of a motion that the bill be read for a second time. This means that the majority agree with the main idea of the bill and that the House can now discuss it in more detail.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through here. )

Background to the bill

The National Gambling Reform Bill 2012 was introduced along with the National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 1) 2012 and the National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 2) 2012. Together, these bills relate to a national scheme for gaming machines in order to reduce the harms associated with gambling on these machines.

According to the bills digest, these bills introduce the following:

• from the end of 2013, new electronic gaming machines ('EGMs') either manufactured in, or imported into, Australia be capable of supporting an approved precommitment system
• by 2016, EGMs be linked together as part of a state-wide or territory-wide precommitment system, and display electronic warning messages (with extended timelines for smaller venues) and
• from 1 May 2013 Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) located in gaming venues have a $250 daily withdrawal limit.(Read more about the bills in the bills digest of the National Gambling Reform Bill 2012.

)

Precommitment involves a gambler setting a loss limit before they commence playing. Independent MP Andrew Wilkie made the introduction of mandatory precommitment a key part of his agreement to support the minority Gillard Labor Government after the 2010 election.(Read more about Mr Wilkie's commitment to introducing precommitment here. ) Although the Labor Government originally agreed to introduce mandatory precommitment, these bills limit the reforms to ensuring the EGMs have precommitment capability.(Read more about the change in the Labor Government's approach to gambling reform on ABC News here.) There will also be a mandatory precommitment trial, to test its feasibility.

9th Feb 2012, 12:55 PM – SenateDocuments — Gambling; Order for the Production of Documents - Division No. 6

Senator Richard Di Natale, and also on behalf of Senator Xenophon, moved:

That there be laid on the table by 27 February 2012 by the Minister representing the Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (Senator Evans) any advice or documentation received by the Government regarding the cost of implementing $1 bet limits on poker machines, particularly in relation to the $1.5 billion figure referred to by the Minister in public comments.