David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Communications, Senator McAllister. This morning on Radio National, a woman who was referred to as 'Kate' shared the story of her brother, a 24-year-old man who tragically took his own life because he could not escape the predatory tactics of the gambling industry. She gave evidence to the Murphy inquiry, and she is asking the government to heed its findings and put in place a full ban on gambling advertising. She doesn't want other families to experience the awful loss that hers has. But, after a year of hearing nothing, she is asking: 'What is it going to take?' Minister, can you answer Kate's question and tell us: what is it going to take for the government to listen to the evidence and ban all gambling advertising?

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Emergency Management) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Pocock asks about the interview provided by a woman who was referred to as 'Kate' this morning. Can I start by really acknowledging the public contribution that this woman is making, her courage in telling her story publicly and the contribution that I understand that she made to the inquiry into gambling harms.

I say to Senator Pocock that the government has made it clear that we are deeply concerned about gambling harms. It is one of the reasons that we have taken so many steps since election to deliver reforms to prevent online wagering harm. Indeed, I would assert that more reform has been undertaken in the last two years than was delivered in the preceding decade. Those reforms include: banning the use of credit cards for online gambling; introducing new evidence based taglines in wagering advertising; strengthening classification of gambling-like features in video games to protect children; establishing mandatory customer ID verification for online wagering; and, most importantly, launching the national self-exclusion register, BetStop, for problem gamblers. More than 28,000 Australians have now registered, and 40 per cent of those have opted for self-imposed lifetime bans. BetStop is the most effective harm-reduction initiative to date in terms of directly helping Australians who are experiencing harm, and I encourage anyone who is experiencing harm from online wagering to visit the website of www.betstop.gov.au.

The senator asks about our model to reduce wagering ads, and we are consulting on this at the moment. We are focused on objectives to reducing exposure of children— (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Pocock, a first supplementary?

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question was about gambling advertising. This young man's family say that he was hounded to death by Sportsbet through an endless stream of advertising and direct inducements like bonus bets. This morning Kate said, 'I really feel that those inducements made him feel the only way out was to end his life.' Minister, if you are not going to talk about gambling advertising, and clearly you are not going for a full gambling ad ban, can you at least confirm to us that the government will ban online gambling inducements?

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Emergency Management) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, as I started to indicate in my answer to your primary question, we are consulting on a proposed model to reduce wagering ads and we are focused on three outcomes: reducing the exposure of children to gambling ads, breaking the nexus of wagering and sport, and tackling the targeting and saturation of ads. The government continues to consult with stakeholders, and I would make the additional point that these reforms to wagering advertising will form just one part of the government's comprehensive response to the 31 recommendations made by the parliamentary inquiry.

We understand that advertising reform is complex. Industry stakeholders and harm advocates, for different reasons, are putting their views forward, and we are considering multiple channels over which advertising is delivered—not just TV and radio, but digital platforms and social media where advertising targets vulnerable Australians. (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Pocock, second supplementary?

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government certainly make it more complex than the Murphy review recommended, which was a full ban on gambling advertising. The Prime Minister said he doesn't think gambling ads should be shown during G-rated programs. How about the following? LEGO Masters, Glee, The Simpsons, Young Sheldon, Bondi Vet, Home and Awayall of these programs are PG-rated; all of these programs are shown in family viewing times. Does your government think gambling ads should be shown during these programs?

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Emergency Management) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I've indicated, the government is consulting with stakeholders. It is complex; it is important that we hear views, that we avoid unintended consequences and that we take the time to get it right. I'm not in a position to confirm the outcome of those consultations. The minister will update the chamber and the parliament when those consultations are concluded, but it is obvious that meaningful action is required. The number of people betting on sports has doubled in the last five years. More than one-quarter of men aged 18 to 24 and one-third of men aged 25 to 34 now bet on sport, and 10 per cent of sports betters are classified as having a problem with gambling. Australians lose more than $25 billion in gambling every year. It's the highest per capita in the world. It is why we need to get the reforms right to deliver harm reduction and cultural change.