11 October 2024

Gambling problem 'small' in the ACT, local clubs say

| James Coleman
Join the conversation
14

Clubs ACT CEO Craig Shannon says it’s shameful how “anti-gambling advocates catastrophise the issue”. Photo: Thomas Lucraft.

The ACT clubs industry has hit back at claims it has suffered no losses in revenue from the removal of poker machines from its venues, and says the government should look elsewhere if it wants to seriously tackle gambling harm.

A research paper, released this week by the ANU’s Centre for Social Policy Research, looked at electronic gaming machine (EGM, or ‘pokies’) usage across the ACT between 2016 and 2024 and how various government policies over that time affected it.

Since 2016, two successive terms of government have attempted to slash the number of EGMs across the ACT from 5000 to 3500, in a bid to reduce “gambling harm”.

READ ALSO Town centre shops part of Labor plans to boost build-to-rent projects

Measures included carrot approaches like paying venues $20,000 to become “pokie-free”, but also a stick, in the form of the Gaming Machine (Compulsory Surrender) Amendment Bill 2024 which will allow the government to force venues to surrender EGM licences come May 2025.

However, the paper found these measures had only led to existing machines being use “more intensively”, with no evidence of any change to the amount of money coming in.

Around $176 million was spent on pokies across the ACT in 2015, which grew to $188 million in 2024, leading the authors to conclude venues “have not lost revenue”.

In response, ACT Chief Minister Andrew Barr said the study needed to be viewed in light of population growth and inflation since 2016 rather than “just using a strict assessment of dollars spent on poker machines”.

A row of poker machines

The cost of a poker machine ranges between $20,000 and $40,000 before licensing fees. Photo: Michelle Kroll.

In response to questions from Region, ClubsACT broadly agreed and argued it had lost EGM revenue over the past 11 years, but added dollar figures were a clumsy way of judging the prevalence of gambling harm.

“The travesty revealed by the report is the academics use of club ‘revenue’ being used as a ‘proxy’ indicator for gambling harm, which in and of itself is ridiculous, counter-productive and poorly evidenced,” CEO Craig Shannon said.

“Even by the government’s own estimates as a percentage of the population, people with a gambling problem are small in number in the ACT. It’s shameful the way some anti-gambling advocates continue to catastrophise the issue in the ACT.”

According to a 2014 survey, cited by the ACT Government’s “gambling harm prevention strategy”, 15,000 Canberrans experience harm from their gambling (5.4 per cent of adults) and 43,000 (16 per cent) have had a family member with gambling issues.

READ ALSO The brown stuff’s going to hit the whirly thing, the only question is when?

“The only truth revealed in the ANU report is that we have been subjected to non-evidence based policy that is having little if any value in terms of harm minimisation in real terms,” Mr Shannon said.

He said online gambling was emerging as “the growth market of real concern” while in-venue gambling was “just low hanging fruit for those seeking publicity and political opportunism”.

“We want the ACT to continue to lead Australia in gambling harm prevention but that will not be achieved through machine prohibition as some advocate,” Mr Shannon said.

“That model punishes casual gamblers who participate for entertainment whilst encouraging problem gamblers to move online or cross the border to NSW.”

According to a ‘National Gambling Trends Study’ released by the Australian Institute of Family Studies in October last year, among Australian adults who reported gambling regularly on pokies, the majority reported also gambling on lottery games (81.2%), instant scratch tickets (67.4%), horse racing (62.7%), sports events (55.9%) and keno (53.4%).

ACT Labor has promised to further cut the number of pokies in the ACT to 1000 by 2045, while also targeting online gambling, but didn’t confirm what these measures would look like.

The ACT Greens want to go even harder, by bringing this deadline forward and introducing a monitoring system which would limit losses.

Join the conversation

14
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

43,000 people is made to sound like a small amount of people in this article. But it really isn’t….

When your whole business model is predicated on ‘nothing to see here’, this is about surprising as the sun coming up in the morning.

what a load of self-serving bollocks

Would a hunting eagle insist that there was no problem, but perhaps the prey would have a different aspect.

Boo hoo I’m crying crocodile tears!

Watch out Dr Marisa Paterson, they’re big and they’re ugly!

It frustrates me that I can’t play poker (a game of skill) online in this country and I can’t play pub poker in the ACT at all. I have to go to Queanbeyan to play at my buy-in level or play at the casino for serious money.

But, I can pump literally pump the mortgage through an online sportsbook or the pokies (and I know people who have) and no one would say boo.

The gambling laws in this country are not fit for purpose. The reason state & federal governments deny a pastime like poker to responsible gamblers is because they don’t genuinely want to do anything about mitigating the serious causes of gambling harm.

Governments should realise that like it or not gambling is a legitimate way to spend their money if that’s what they choose to do. Instead of cherry-picking this or that form of gambling for banning governments should be focused on predatory behaviour of gambling companies, protecting problem gamblers from themselves and protecting children.

Governments should leave the rest of us to get on with making our own choices.

@Seano
As someone whose only gambling vice, is an occasional donation to Lottery Corporation, I won’t be affected by the proposed legislation one way or the other.

Nevertheless, I find it interesting that you are anti “gambling companies” but appear to be pro casinos and clubs with pokies. Surely, as business ventures that make some or all of their income from gambling, casinos and clubs with pokies are also “gambling companies”?

I personally know two families whose lives were very adversely affected by one family member’s addiction to pokies. For one, a potentially fatal reaction to a ‘pokie losing streak’ led to incarceration but fortunately subsequent rehabilitation, and that person is back in the community as a valued contributor. The second resulted in a very acrimonious divorce and a long road back to financial and emotional well-being for the non-addicted partner and I’m not sure what became of the addict.

So, while I have no doubt that you are capable of using your chosen form of gambling, for what it was intended – entertainment, I don’t think it’s only the betting companies which are the villains in this play.

Scott Nofriends1:42 pm 13 Oct 24

Well said Seano.
My two younger brothers live in Queensland and play club poker a couple of times a week.
For a few hours enjoyment and social interaction (something most pokie users and sports betters miss out on), they spend far less than what a half hour in front of one of those evil machines can cost. They also buy meals and drinks at the venues. It’s a joke we can’t do the same here in the ACT.

At no stage did I make a “pro” argument for any organisation.

I recognise that there are significant gambling harms in the community that must be addressed.

My point is that instead of addressing these harms in a sensible way that recognises that gambling is a legitimate pastime for many people, governments have merely banned poker both online and in the ACT everywhere except for in cash games at the casino.

Governments have done this rather than take on the gambling companies (which includes everything from sportsbooks to pubs & clubs) because it’s easy and at the time gave them something to point at as an achievement.

My point is people should be able to legally gamble whether it be poker or betting the horses or even the pokies with appropriate checks and balances to protect the vulnerable. Not restricting a subset of gambling (and forcing it underground) while raking in the taxes and doing nothing about serious harm from other forms.

@seano
Last I saw casino Canberra still had Thursday holdem tournaments for ~$130 buy in, never found the time to go but price point isn’t terrible for that.

@justsayin
You may have misread the comment, pokie machines don’t play poker. They play bings, bongs, and flashing lights.
Poker is a different thing – primarily because you aren’t playing the house, you’re playing other players.
Definitely can be abused by a person on a losing streak, like any other type of gambling, but it doesn’t have baked in loss percentages.

Thx TK.

I wasn’t sure that the Thursday tournaments were regular. Whilst I can comfortably afford a $130 buy-in, if pubs were allowed to hold poker tournaments in the ACT there would be buy-ins half or even less than that on more than just a Thursday night. Making the whole thing much less expensive and therefore more social.

Also if I could play online. I could play a $5 sit and go for an hour as a pastime. To play online now Australian players have to go to unregulated internet backwater site and use bitcoin.

The current laws aren’t fit for purpose and targeting poker was just picking on the low-hanging fruit rather than enacting serious gambling reform.

My understanding is the current ACT arrangements are effectively nothing but a contractual term set up in relation to the casino being set up in the town – a trade off to them not having pokies, amongst other things. I assume there are probably contractual terms around it that make a repeal a pretty awkward thing to get rid of. It is a restriction that doesn’t make much sense at all.

Yes, I thought the arrangement with the casino was something along those lines JS9 and I agree it’s an arrangement that doesn’t make much sense for Canberrans.

Clearly, it’s an arrangement to help the casino get poker players through the door who would otherwise not go to the casino.

The ban on pub poker in the ACT is tet another example of state and federal governments looking after the interests of gambling companies, not punters.

Governments are not serious about sensible gambling reforms.

Thx Scott.

There’s something to be said about the problematic online poker ban in Australia forcing players into pubs and clubs where there are pokies and the even worse ban on pub poker in the ACT forcing players to the casino where there are pokies and casino games and the few tournaments are at a significantly high buyin or there’s the alternative of cash game poker where hundreds or even thousands can be lost on a single hand.

Meanwhile, we talk about men not having social outlets and the negative impacts of that in society, I like your brothers would play once or twice a week when we lived in Sydney and it was a relatively inexpensive social outlet as much as a game of poker.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.