With such a conflict of interest, state governments and clubs are most unlikely to lead the way in significant gambling reform. It also explains why, in the current campaign against Mandatory Pre-Commitment (MPC), clubs overstate the negative impacts virtually proclaiming the world (as they know it) will end.
In a futile endeavour to take the high moral ground over the MPC proposals, Clubs Australia resorts to arguments about democratic rights and assaults on the freedom of the individual. They allege their opponents are turning Australia into a nanny state, blindly ignoring the fact that the state often creates regulations limiting freedoms, in the interests of the community, from compulsory seatbelts in cars to curtailing the availability of harmful substances.
So thank heavens for Andrew Wilkie MP and Senator Nick Xenophon, and the Australian Churches Task Group with spokespersons like Reverend Tim Costello, who have created a climate in which politicians on both sides of politics can entertain courageous actions to limit the damage of the poker machine industry, building on the data and recommendations of the Productivity Commission. Well done to the Gillard government in signalling it will stand up for reasonable legislation (which takes into consideration local impacts) to implement MPC.
Advertisement
Sadly, the Opposition leader has seemingly come to a different conclusion, one that smells of political expediency rather than moral leadership in the national interest. However, maybe the right decision will also be the politically correct view if the result of a poll announced last July is accurate. Australian National University researchers found that 74 per cent of respondents agreed with the proposition that “people should be limited to spending an amount they nominate before they start gambling”.
Apparently, the public has sound instincts on this issue, for MPC is premised on the common sense view that once gamblers are ‘in the zone’, mesmerised by all the bells and whistles of the gaming room, they are less likely to make safe choices. In a recent article in the respected medical journal Lancet Dr David Hodgins of the University of Calgary gave support to the anticipated Australian MPC initiative adding that it is likely to give problem and at risk gamblers some defence against their vulnerability to myths like the belief that the only way to recover losses is to continue gambling or the belief that a win is due after several losses.
While it is arguable that MPC will not “cure” entrenched problem gambling, its impact on the bottom line of big clubs, especially in large urban centres, is likely to expose those clubs who, unjustifiably, rely on problem gamblers to maintain their operations.
There is no suggestion of a prohibitionist approach here. However, reducing the sheer volume of gambling in the community has to be helpful, but it is a lesson we learn slowly. If Mr Wilkie and Co. have a win this time there are plenty of other challenges awaiting them: internet gambling and escalating sports betting for a start. Come to think of it, my schoolboy essay has not really dated: Australia faces a major problem in trying to stop a contagion.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
7 posts so far.