Skip to content Skip to main navigation


Recruiting experts in
Accountancy & Finance

Did I hear right? Stanhope defending the pokies …

By I-filed - 4 September 2010 40

I couldn’t believe my ears this morning – on 666, Stanhope – I’ve never heard him so animated! – on the topic of pokies.

He committed to defending the clubs and their pokies to the hilt.

Now, I have an issue with the argument that “community groups and clubs will suffer if we regulate the pokies harder” – when said community groups are dispensed money at the expense of gamblers’ families.

Is there any question that pokie addicts are putting welfare and child support money into the one-armed bandits? I’ll bet that for every dollar dispensed to a sporting club by one of the union clubs, a few dollars cost accrues to the community at large on other fronts.

Stanhope is of course well aware of community concern across Australia on this issue, and strong backing for Xenophon and the independents on this.

So Stanhope – ever keen to put forward the image of a socially responsible kinda guy – is seriously hoist on the petard of the unions.

Is anyone seriously calling him on this? Opposition? Helloooooooo?

What’s Your opinion?

Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
40 Responses to
Did I hear right? Stanhope defending the pokies …
Hells_Bells74 2:33 pm 04 Sep 10

Well you know I’m keen as mustard to read them, skid.

Not a moment’s thought is given to the day’s worth of losers come scooping up the gold every night.

p1 1:33 pm 04 Sep 10

Dr Strange said :

Their Number 3 reasons was ‘Cheaper Beer’.

This is the one and only reason for pokies. There used to be the Schnitzel at Dickson tradies, but that went down hill.

grumpyrhonda 1:13 pm 04 Sep 10

Tempestas said :

The damage the damn things cause should be reason enough alone to treat them like tobacco.

The damage alcohol does should be reason enough to ban it.
I’m tired of the majority being regulated due to a minority who cannot control themselves. No, I’m not a big pokie player. I understand my limits. No, I don’t drink alcohol, just recognise the damage it does. As for treating the pokies like tobacco, once again, I will compare it to alcohol. I would love to see a proper study done on the comparisons between adverse affects of alcohol and tobacco. Including the affect on the health system and the crime statistics.

PM 12:36 pm 04 Sep 10

On ABC the Libs were criticising Stanhope’s conflict of interest.

Meanwhile, Stanhope is happy to impose higher operating costs on pubs (ie those who no pokie revenue stream) as part of new liquor laws.

54-11 12:06 pm 04 Sep 10

Please do that, skid. Jeez, Jon, you could have at least made the greedy self-interest a little more subtle than that.

Tempestas 12:04 pm 04 Sep 10

The damage the damn things cause should be reason enough alone to treat them like tobacco.

Given that at current rate there is only 4 or 5 clubs in the ACT (Sth Cross/Hellenic/Labor/Tradies/Eastlakes), as well as the Wilkie pre-commitment thing we should aim for 1 machine for each 1,000 population – so the clubs can fight over the 300 odd machines for the entire ACT and actually focus on getting people through the door for other reasons.

If they can’t then I’m sure that there are plenty of real community organisations that could use the facilities

TVStar 12:02 pm 04 Sep 10

Canberra Labor Club funds Canberra Labor. Are these the type of ‘community groups and clubs’ Stanhope is talking about?

Skidbladnir 11:47 am 04 Sep 10

When I have some suitably free time, I’ll do the MegaClub rundown again based on 08-09 figures if the readership is keen.
09-10 numbers are due out real soon now, it just takes a while to establish and cross-refer the data sets.

Its not like Stanhope bothers to hide the fact that he is pro-pokie, not only is he the local Party Head for the region holding more than half the ALP asset base (pokies at the Labor Clubs, and their associated cashflow), he’s a speaker at ClubsACT conferences.

Mathman 11:39 am 04 Sep 10

p1 said :

there is an opposition in the ACT? They sure do keep a low profile.

Didn’t they join up with Labor to form a minority government?

Dr Strange 11:29 am 04 Sep 10

Was channel surfing last night and heard a spokesperson for I think Clubs NSW defending the pokies. Their Number 3 reasons was ‘Cheaper Beer’. Ban the abominations.

Waiting For Godot 11:25 am 04 Sep 10

So Stanhope is supporting pokies while his big boss has just done a deal with a Tasmanian independent to crack down on the one-armed bandits. As Sir Joh once said “It’s very difficult having your feet on both sides of the fence. I’ve heard it can be very uncomfortable”.

p1 11:15 am 04 Sep 10

there is an opposition in the ACT? They sure do keep a low profile.

Mathman 10:27 am 04 Sep 10

“community groups and clubs will suffer if we regulate the pokies harder’

Let me translate that:

Community groups = people with a common interest that cause them to associate near poker machines

Clubs = organisations that own buildings that house poker machines

As a member of a few community groups and clubs that do not fit the above definition, I can attest that poker machines do not benefit us.

sepi 10:18 am 04 Sep 10

It is rubbish anyway that community groups benefit.

The tradies has got rid of all their holiday cottages and bike display that used to benefit community members, and the southern cross club is turning their bowls green into units.

The only people who benefit seem to be the board members.

Special G 10:07 am 04 Sep 10

All poker machines should be banned. They are specifically targetting people with gambling addiction for the majority of their revenue.

1 2 3

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. | |

Search across the site