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

I rise in support of these amendments. As I said during the last parliamentary sitting, the Interactive Gambling Amendment (Credit and Other Measures) Bill 2023 in its unamended form is a small but significant step towards addressing the harms of gambling in Australia. Prohibiting the acceptance of credit cards, credit related products and digital currency as means of payment for online gambling services is necessary but not sufficient.

The amendments proposed now by the member for Wentworth go further towards addressing the reforms needed. We've been waiting six months for the government to respond to the strong recommendations in the You win some, you lose more report from the Social Policy and Legal Affairs Committee, of which I'm a member. We need to see a consistent regulatory framework across the country. We need measures to address the pervasive advertising associated with online gambling, a coordinated public education campaign, a mechanism to monitor and develop consumer protection for interactive gambling and simulated gambling, and the banning of all political donations from gambling companies. If the government won't draft its own legislation to address these matters, then it can start by accepting these amendments.

In mid-2022, a survey showed 71 per cent of Australians supported a ban on gambling ads. All of the research is telling us that the immersive technology platforms not only mean people can gamble whenever they want 24/7 but that these interactive platforms are becoming more and more sophisticated with their targeted, invasive advertising strategies on social media and direct messaging. This is why the amendment to ban advertising by interactive gambling businesses is necessary and urgent.

These amendments also prohibit providers from making political donations. We read in the AFR today that the communications minister, who regulates gambling, was taken out to lunch for her birthday by the gambling lobbyists, after a long history of receiving hospitality and donations from gambling companies and gambling lobbyists: tickets to the races, shows at Crown casino and hosted fundraising dinners. None of these things are against the currently overly lax rules, but they're just wrong. I can't imagine that many Australians would be happy about this.

My restoring trust bill, introduced into this House in August, includes a proposed reform banning donations from any company inflicting social harm. The very broad consensus, supported by alarming data, is that gambling does a great deal of harm, not just significant financial harm but psychological and social harms as well. In 2022, gambling and alcohol companies contributed $2 million to major parties. Sportsbet donated $278,000, including a donation of $19,000 to the communications minister in the week of the election. We clearly need to remove the influence and perception of influence of gambling companies from the political arena.

These amendments would also prevent online gambling providers from employing senior government advisers. This is important. A revolving door between government and gambling companies will not fill us with confidence that the government is making decisions in the best interests of the community. It gives gambling companies inside information and increases their influence. The many people across Australia experiencing gambling harm just do not have this type of influence. Government should be looking out for them, not for the companies that inflict the harm and may employ them one day.

Another proposed amendment goes beyond the interactive gambling inquiry and requires Treasury to fix the GST problem when it comes to gambling. WA has banned pokies. We're very proud of it. This has had bipartisan support for a long time in WA. As a result, the WA government earns no revenue from pokies, and we wouldn't want to change that. We look at the other states, and we see how hard it is to get rid of pokies when you're already getting a cut of the profits. This is yet another example of how money influences decisions in this gambling space.

We need governments to be making decisions in the interests of communities, not gambling companies. I support these amendments wholeheartedly. If the government is not willing to accept them—communities across Australia will be watching very carefully, expecting to see these types of changes announced. Next week marks six months since the committee report came out. This is the period during which government is expected to respond. Time is up. We must clean up online gambling in Australia.

See this speech in context