Chris Ketter (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to participate in this MPI on the issue of whether or not there is a need for the federal government to take a stronger, more active and direct role in the regulation of harmful and predatory gambling. I just want to talk from a personal perspective in commencing my remarks in this debate to indicate that, whilst I understand the theoretical argument in Senator Abetz's contribution that individuals should take responsibility for their own behaviour, the issue of children now being involved in online gambling is, I think, a matter that we all, as parents, need to be concerned about.

Labor's position is that we understand that there are community concerns about the growth of gambling advertising and online betting, including sports betting. I know that one of the problems that we see is that young people, particularly teenagers, are looking at the growth of gambling advertising, particularly around sporting events, and this then becomes an entree into the world of gambling. I must say, from my own personal concerns, I have seen friends of my own children being involved in online gambling. There have been some concerns expressed to me by my children about the impact that this is having on their friends to the extent where you see young people, with their access to smartphones, having the opportunity around the clock to participate in gambling activities.

I'm not aware of the specific gambling sites that young people are accessing, but I do know the impact that gambling is having on some young people. It impacts on their studies. It impacts on the activities they do in the real world and their opportunity to participate in sporting activities. It can get to the stage where young people spend a great deal of their time online and involved in this type of addictive behaviour. This is a concern to me personally as a parent. I think it behoves all of us to look at that aspect of this issue.

I want to talk a little bit more a little later on about Labor's position, particularly with respect to the interactive gambling bill that was considered by this parliament a couple of years ago. As I said, we believe that advertising of legitimate sports betting can and should be well-regulated so that we don't see the levels of addiction to gambling arising that I talked about. As I said, we believe that a well-regulated gambling industry must be underpinned by harm minimisation measures. My personal view is that children should be protected from this addiction.

We know that gambling in our community can have, and in some cases has had, devastating social, financial and emotional consequences. That's why we on this side of the chamber maintain a strong stance to ensure that appropriate harm minimisation measures are in place that protect and assist our community. In fact, when we were last in office we commissioned the Productivity Commission to update its previous reports on the gambling industry in Australia. We rejected recommendations to water down Australia's online-gaming laws until harm minimisation strategies were adopted. In fact, it was Labor that led the way with gambling advertising reform in 2013, when we were in government, by limiting the promotion of betting odds and limiting gambling advertising during live sports broadcasts on television and radio.

I acknowledge the work that Mr Stephen Jones, the member for Throsby, did to drive those reforms at that time. The bill that was introduced then was designed to limit those gambling ads. Mr Jones was a member of the parliament's Joint Select Gambling Reform Committee and had the intention of rallying support amongst his Labor colleagues to back his private member's bill at the time. It's interesting to note though that, from the other side of the chamber, Mr Frydenberg, the Victorian Liberal, who sat on the gambling reform committee, told the AFL witness at a hearing in March:

… I just think you have not got the balance right. Personally I think there is too much advertising and promotion. I think it is invidious to the sport and I think it is affecting younger people who are exposed to it.

Those are interesting comments. Hopefully, at some point in time there will be bipartisan support for looking more closely at this issue of children being protected from the impacts of online gambling.

We know that there are these harmful and predatory aspects of the gambling industry, but we also need to understand that there is responsible gambling—when people do it in a manner where there is no harm involved—and that there are benefits to communities across the country from revenue raised through gambling, from the horseracing industry to pokies or pub poker nights. I want to stress, though, that that needs to happen in a responsible way. I acknowledge that there is always the potential for individuals to be caught up in gambling and for there to be devastating consequences. I'm not seeking to make light of that. I understand that, and that is something that we all need to be cognisant of. But responsible gambling can also have some benefits for the community. In my home state of Queensland, the Gambling Community Benefit Fund provides grants to community organisations of between $500 and $35,000, and there are examples across communities of various grants being given to very worthwhile organisations—the Animal Welfare League Queensland, for example. Parents and citizens associations and men's sheds are organisations that are beneficiaries of this particular initiative.

But I want to stress, again, that I'm not making light of gambling. I understand that there are some devastating examples of where individuals are caught up in it and it has significant impacts on the families of individuals. I'm particularly concerned about, as I say, the impact on young people. We also have the country horserace meetings in Queensland which, it's been said, are the lifeblood of many Queensland towns. Queensland has a long history of gaming regulation going back to the 1840s, when we first had it.

So a balanced approach on this particular issue is absolutely essential. We have an approach, on this side of the chamber, of being balanced and productive in these matters. In contrast, we've seen the government having a piecemeal approach, which is typical of their side of politics.