Pubs and clubs lobby groups reject gambling reform recommendations
Powerful gambling industry lobby groups have rejected key recommendations from a recent government report on gambling reform. The pubs and clubs lobby argue that there's insufficient evidence to support the proposed changes.
The Independent Panel on Gambling Reform's final report, released on Tuesday, highlighted the limitations of a government-led cashless gaming trial. Due to a small participant pool, the trial couldn't definitively determine whether spending limits would effectively curb problem gambling.
Of the 14 active participants, a single individual accounted for a significant portion of the total spending. Industry employees who tested the technology were excluded from the data.
Gaming Minister David Harris' spokesperson indicated that the government won't rush into implementing changes, citing the complexity of the issues raised in the 530-page report.
“It is important that people have an opportunity to read the panel’s report while the government thoroughly considers it,” Harris said.
The Minns government has initiated a trial of cashless poker machine technology, fulfilling an election promise and following a NSW Crime Commission report highlighting billions of dollars in illicit funds flowing through the state's gaming machines.
An independent panel recommended a central player database to curb money laundering, requiring mandatory account creation with default time and spending limits. While these limits wouldn't be enforced, cash transactions would be capped.
The panel claimed its recommendations balanced harm minimisation with industry viability. However, the panel's own advisory group, including industry representatives, law enforcement, and harm minimisation advocates, has strongly criticised the proposal.
The Australian Hotels Association (AHA) dismissed the supporting research as "embarrassing and not credible," citing a 3Arc report based on a survey of just two players, neither of whom had used the proposed technology. The AHA also pointed out that the panel failed to address key issues such as technology, infrastructure, cost, and industry impact, as originally intended.
“This was the panel’s primary purpose. Without this information, it is not possible to make an evidence-based recommendation on statewide account-based gaming – particularly as it was not trialled in any venue,” the AHA’s feedback said.
ClubsNSW supported fewer than half the recommendations and noted the potential for job tens of thousands of job losses and venue closures.
“We are concerned that the executive committee’s report will give the government and other stakeholders a misleading impression that the recommendations have been informed by robust evidence and analysis,” the clubs lobby said.
While harm minimisation groups largely supported the panel's recommendations, they expressed concern over the lack of mandatory spending and time limits. Wesley Mission argued that without these restrictions, a digital payment system could lead to increased gambling harm.
NSW Council of Social Services emphasised that low participation in the voluntary trial shouldn't be seen as a failure. They drew a parallel to seatbelt laws, stating that criticising low uptake is akin to blaming the absence of seatbelts for rising road fatalities.
Panel chair Michael Foggo acknowledged the limitations of a voluntary, non-statewide trial but noted that it was a necessary first step. He emphasised that the recommendations were intended to be refined over time.
Opposition politicians criticised the government's approach, accusing it of delaying meaningful reform. Shadow Gaming Minister Kevin Anderson argued that the report offered little substance and merely kicked the issue down the road.
Greens MP Cate Faehrmann condemned the AHA's response, accusing the lobby group of prioritising industry interests over public health. She highlighted the AHA's opposition to any changes to the Gaming Act that would prioritise harm reduction.
Jonathan Jackson, 4th December 2024
