Kate Chaney (Curtin, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

In June 2023, the House Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs, of which I'm a member, completed its inquiry into online gambling after 40 hours of hearings and 161 submissions. The committee's report, You win some, you lose more, includes 31 recommendations. These 31 recommendations urge this government to respond with a national strategy for online gambling harm reduction based on public health principles. This reflects the very broad consensus and alarming supporting data that gambling does a great deal of harm—not just significant financial harm but psychological and social harm too. This data is strongly supported by multiple submissions the committee received, many of which are informed by personal lived experiences, close observation and participation in the gambling industry.

At its most extreme, gambling amounts to a recognised disorder and is medically identified as a behavioural addiction. It has a material effect on the brain's reward, prioritisation and stress symptoms. Gambling disorders impact individuals but also lead to problems for their families and invariably impact their workplace and broader society. Some groups are more vulnerable: young men, young people generally, culturally and linguistically diverse groups, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and people with mental health conditions or substance abuse issues. Australians lose approximately $25 billion a year on legal forms of gambling, representing the largest per capita losses in the world.

The research is telling us that, compared to land based gambling, the risks of harm associated with online gambling are far higher. Online gambling is particularly insidious because it's private, it's socially invisible and it's accessible 24/7. It is easy for companies to use your personal information against you. Through algorithmic decisions, spending opportunities will be configured to target your vulnerabilities and how you play. This is largely because of the highly accessible and immersive technology used for online gambling apps and interfaces, as well as the especially pervasive advertising associated with online gambling.

There's been a threefold increase in gambling advertising over the last decade, estimated at a massive $287 million in 2021, an increase of $16 million from 2020. Wagering operators have developed and targeted advertising platforms and strategies to promote their products on television and radio and in print, but they are becoming increasingly sophisticated with online and more interactive platforms, social media, and direct messaging. The result is that gambling is now completely normalised in every aspect of Australian life through ever-present advertising. We should be very concerned.

This amendment, the Interaction Gambling Amendment (Credit and Other Measures) Bill, is a small but significant amendment towards addressing the harms of gambling in Australia. It is a timid, small start. The Interactive Gambling Act already regulates online and over-the-phone gambling services and prohibits wagering service providers from providing credit to customers. This bill will amend that act to prohibit the acceptance of credit cards, credit related products and digital currency as payment methods for interactive wagering services for customers who are physically present in Australia. By banning the use of credit cards and digital currencies for interactive services, this will create the much needed consistency and bring online gambling services and products in line with in-person gambling transactions, where credit cards have been banned in each state and territory for almost 20 years. So I welcome and support this amendment to ban the availability of credit and digital currency payment options and consequential sanctions and penalties.

I note from submissions made to both inquiries before the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs Committee and the Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee that major wagering companies do not oppose this ban. Tabcorp agrees that wagering customers should only be able to conduct their wagering activity with their own clear funds. This is worth noting. The hard work on gambling reform that will affect the profits of gambling companies is yet to come. We must also remain alert to the continued involvement of foreign companies that dominate the newer online gambling market, engaging in predatory behaviours to continue to pursue high profits. Whilst this amendment bans the use of credit and digital currencies in relation to customers physically present in Australia, it's highly likely that foreign wagering companies will explore ways to get around the ban.

As welcome as this amendment is, it's nevertheless an isolated measure. The many reforms we need to address should be done in concert with each other as part of a dedicated national gambling strategy. As the social policy and legal affairs committee concluded some months ago, that strategy should be viewed through the lens of gambling harm reduction and based on public health principles. I urge the government to make a commitment to developing a national strategy that will address harm from gambling rather than fragmented reforms initiated by individual portfolios. There should be a single portfolio and minister with responsibility for executing this national strategy for gambling reform. As an example of fragmentation, the government has chosen in this amendment to exempt lotteries and keno products from the credit ban in this bill. Developing technologies and the proliferation of new apps have changed the impact of lottery and keno products and will continue to do so as technology advances and wagering companies continually innovate to maintain their high sales. This highlights the imperative for a broad national gambling strategy that approaches the whole industry from the perspective of public health and financial harms rather than addressing siloed reforms.

Reviews into online gambling and illegal offshore gambling are not new. Following a 2015 review, the Liberal government decided to set up a Commonwealth and state government National Consumer Protection Framework for Online Wagering. Eight years on, the final framework reform, the BetStop platform, was introduced in August this year. The purpose of BetStop is to empower individuals to sign up voluntarily to exclude themselves from wagering platforms. The first problem with BetStop is that I'm not convinced it's working. A constituent of mine signed up to exclude himself from 100 platforms, and he still received a barrage of promotional material. The second problem with a measure like BetStop is that it puts the onus on the individual. I applaud anyone who can voluntarily exclude themselves from activities that will cause them and others harm, but, as with many addictions, not everyone can do this successfully. It is not a fair fight between the online gambling companies who have 200 pieces of data about each customer and the individual battling with gambling issues. The point is that gambling in this country has become a public health issue, and we need all these measures and many more across the country to provide consistency as part of a targeted national gambling strategy.

One of the most important areas that requires reform is gambling advertising. There's really broad community agreement that we have a problem. In mid-2022 a survey showed 71 per cent of Australians supported a ban on gambling ads. This support isn't partisan; it's well-spread across voting intentions. I've been contacted by more 50 constituents seeking action on this issue. So, where there's clearly strong support for better regulation, why is the government dragging its heels on reform?

The committee recommended a phased and comprehensive ban on online gambling advertising. It's sensible and achievable and would provide key sports codes, broadcasters and other stakeholders with a period in which to adjust to an Australia that doesn't normalise and promote gambling. The opposition's recent support for banning ads during free-to-air sports broadcasts is welcome, but we need to go much further, into online ads and other types of promotion. Otherwise, the ads just shift. Partial bans will always deliver, at best, only partial results.

We need a bold and brave approach that stands up to vested interests across this industry—to the media, to sporting codes and to money and power. Gambling is a public health issue. I support this bill, but I again call for the government to commit to the development of an effective national gambling strategy with a central purpose of reducing social and other harms, one that addresses not only the pressing issues relating to all forms of gambling advertising but other significant priorities as well, including a consistent regulatory framework across the country, a coordinated public education campaign, a mechanism to monitor and develop consumer protection for interactive gaming and simulated gambling, and the banning of all political donations from gambling companies.

See this speech in context