Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I hear the member opposite interjecting and asking, 'Well, is gambling not addictive?' That is right; gambling is not addictive, and I find it incredible that Labor members are so ignorant of this fact. The reality is that—

Ms Rishworth interjecting—

The member opposite now goes and makes a huge jump to make the statement, 'Oh, so no-one gets addicted to gambling!' No. Some people do get addicted to gambling; absolutely. I would not dispute that for one moment.

This is the crazy, twisted logic of the Australian Labor Party. Some people get addicted to gambling—in the same way that some people get addicted to alcohol, some people get addicted to exercise, some people get addicted to dopamine and some people get addicted to eating poppy seeds—but we do not run around and ban all of those things. I have news for Labor members opposite: some people get addicted to poppy seeds, but we do not ban them on fruit toast, on buns or as a product in stores. The simple reality is that Labor members opposite and the member for Denison and the Independent Senator Nick Xenophon do not understand that because some people unfortunately have a problem controlling impulses it does not mean that we therefore go and regulate an entire industry out of existence. The reality is that the vast majority of people do not struggle with problem gambling. The vast majority of people find gambling a recreational tool. They enjoy it. They go and have a flutter. They go and enjoy themselves, whether it be on the gee-gees, the dogs, or online or in a poker tournament, or on a hand of blackjack or a poker machine. They do it in a responsible way because they are adults. They do not need Labor members of parliament telling them how to live their lives.

To highlight the absolutely crazy way that the Labor Party gets all breathless about being big government is to witness the debate that has just taken place here in the Federation Chamber. We as coalition members understand that in the main Australians are mature enough to make decisions about what they want to do with their money. The notion that in some way you can parallel having a sports betting company logo on a player's uniform as being the equivalent in a moral sense to a cigarette company logo, is farcical—completely and utterly farcical.

There are millions of people that place bets. What next? Should we ban the Melbourne Cup? Should the Australian Labor Party go out there tut-tutting and getting on their moral high horse, saying, 'Gee, do you know what? There are a lot of Australians who place a bet and'—according to the member opposite—'betting is addictive, so therefore the Melbourne Cup should be off limits. Let us ban the Melbourne Cup.' It all started with Phar Lap and those drug pushers that were running Phar Lap around the ring! It is this kind of completely twisted logic that underscores why the Australian Labor Party would support a recommendation like this. They want to ban having a gambling company's logo on sporting players' uniforms.

See this speech in context