Andrew Wilkie (Denison, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Joint Select Committee on Gambling Reform, I present the committee's report, entitled The design and implementation of a mandatory pre-commitment system for electronic gaming machines, which incorporates a dissenting report, together with the transcript of evidence, submissions and tabled documents.

Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper.

by leave—I present the first report of the Joint Select Committee on Gambling Reform entitled The design and implementation of a mandatory precommitment system for electronic gaming machines. There are 95,000 Australians addicted to poker machines and another 95,000 at risk. For every problem gambler, between five and 10 people are adversely impacted. Poker machine losses amount to some $12 billion a year, 40 per cent of which is from problem gamblers. Individual losses average $1,200 an hour on current high intensity electronic gaming machines. Even if the industry estimate of $3 billion for the cost of implementing precommitment is proven correct, this still represents little more than half what problem gamblers lose in a single year.

The implementation of a mandatory precommitment system on electronic gaming machines—or poker machines—was a major recommendation of the Productivity Commission and is a key aspect of my own limited support for the government. Mandatory precommitment—requiring players to preset limits before they start to gamble—will reduce the harm of poker machines and encourage all players to make rational and conscious decisions about their gambling behaviour. It will result in fewer people becoming problem gamblers in Australia.

This report makes 43 recommendations, most significantly the fitting of mandatory precommitment on all high-intensity poker machines by 2014. Players will need to pre-set their loss limit and will be locked out when that limit is reached. There will be cooling-off periods for limit increases, safeguards to prevent venue or machine hopping and an effective self-exclusion function. There will be no licence to punt and no fingerprinting. Venues will have the choice to change some or all of their poker machines for low-intensity machines having a $1 maximum bet and other loss-limiting features. The 88 per cent of poker machine players who currently wager a dollar or less will barely notice the change except that they will almost always finish their gambling session with more money in their pockets.

The report also recommends that smaller venues—those with 15 machines or less—be given until 2018 to implement the scheme and the establishment of a transition fund to assist them. Foreign tourists in casinos will have the option of being given a 24-hour card to override pre-commitment. And a new independent national body will be established to oversee implementation.

The committee received 119 submissions and heard from a wide range of witnesses from industry, from social service and church organisations, from academia, from experts and, most importantly, from a number of former problem gamblers who bravely chose to share their stories with us and offer their insights. I sincerely thank all these witnesses, as well as the members of the committee and the secretariat staff, for their contributions and efforts.

During the course of the inquiry, it became clear to me from various articles and public comments that unfortunately coalition committee members had already decided their position and that this would be one of dissent. This is disappointing given that they were, like other members of the committee, so strongly affected by the stories of those brave problem gamblers to whom the committee spoke. So too the poker machine industry has been a strident critic of these poker machine reforms. But the industry's multi-million dollar advertising campaign against the reforms—a fear campaign—not to mention intense political lobbying and a smear campaign against me personally, shows how desperate some in the industry are to overturn this historic opportunity for federal intervention in problem gambling.

Yes, we did hear many in the industry express their concern for problem gamblers and I believe that many of these concerns are genuine. But I ask of the others in the poker machine industry why they continue to criticise the Productivity Commission's work and its considered estimates of problem gambling, continue to misrepresent the evidence of precommitment trials, continue to exaggerate the costs, continue to complain about unachievable timelines, continue to overstate community contributions and continue to blame problem gamblers for an addiction caused by a fundamentally unsafe product. The number of Australians touched by or at risk of poker machine problem gambling in one form or another can be measured in the millions. No wonder our children will judge the members and senators of the 43rd Parliament on our willingness and success in seizing this historic moment and doing something about it, as they should. I commend the report to the House.

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to make a statement on the report.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is leave granted?

Tony Smith (Casey, Liberal Party, Deputy Chairman , Coalition Policy Development Committee) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I reluctantly grant leave but point out that the government itself rightly stipulate the program for the day, which states that Mr Wilkie would move that the House take note of the report, the debate be adjourned and Mr Wilkie would then move that the order of the day be referred to the Main Committee. We make the point that it is interesting that government members themselves do not want to follow the program of the manager of government business, but that is obviously a matter for them.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I understand that there has been no real objection to leave being granted. Leave is granted. I call the member for Wakefield.

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Casey for his forbearance. The issue of poker machines is an issue that is very close to my heart. In my maiden speech, I spoke on how poker machines might be regulated in the community and this has been an issue that I have spoken on in the House many times since. So it is a great honour and pleasure to speak on the tabling of the Joint Select Committee on Gambling Reform's report in the House.

It was an honour to work with the committee, particularly with the member for Denison and Senator Nick Xenophon. I think they have done a good job in putting this issue in the public's mind and to the forefront of the business of this parliament. So I hope that the report is read and considered by members and that it helps form a policy response for members.

Great damage is done by poker machines, electronic gaming machines, in our community. If you take the time to meet with people who have become addicted to these machines, you hear a lot of stories about the hardship and sorrow for the victims of these machines: the addicts, and their families, as well as the people around them. We know that one in six Australians who regularly plays these machines becomes addicted to them. We know that on average they lose $21,000 a year. We know that the losers, the addicts, contribute about 40 per cent of the $12 billion in profits that are generated by these machines. Nearly $5 billion is poured into these machines by problem gamblers.

I have seen the damage done by these machines in my own electorate, which I have outlined to the House. I have a treatment service in Salisbury, and I can tell you that some of the people attending that treatment service lose a lot more than $21,000 in a year. The damage that is done by these machines demands a policy response. The two major reports by the Productivity Commission and this parliamentary report provide, I think, a strong foundation for a coherent policy response by this parliament.

There are a number of important recommendations in this parliamentary report entitled The design and implementation of a mandatory pre-commitment system for electronic gaming machines. I would ask the House to pay particular attention to recommendations 2, 11 and 34, which look to having a national jurisdiction for the regulation of these machines, the harmonisation of the standards—the so-called national standard—and also a national research capability. We simply do not regulate these machines appropriately, and we simply do not research their effects enough. Recommendation 12, which outlines our commitment to a pre-commitment system, is particularly important, as is recommendation 23, which outlines the committee's strong support for a self-exclusion scheme that will help addicts exclude themselves from playing these machines when they do not want to. It effectively allows them to bar themselves. I think recommendation 36, which recommends low-intensity machines, is a great step forward. It will do a lot of good in the community and prevent a lot of harm. Finally, recommendation 39 proves that the committee did listen to clubs and small venues and that it is aware of the very genuine concern that they would have trouble in the transition. The committee did listen to industry, to the addicts of these machines as well as to the social welfare organisations.

In conclusion, it has been a great privilege for me to be deputy chair of the committee. Again, I would like to thank the member for Denison for his very good work in chairing the committee. He was very fair to all members of the committee and ran a very good inquiry into this issue.

This is a very important report for the parliament, as I said. It will receive the strong support of the government. I sincerely hope that the recommendations find strong support in this House, and I commend the report to it.

Andrew Wilkie (Denison, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House take note of the report.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: In accordance with standing order 39(c), the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.