After Bree Hughes signed herself up to Victoria’s pubs and clubs pokies self-exclusion program, she didn’t go into any venues for several months.
“I was worried about what might happen if I tried to enter,” she says. “So I didn’t even attempt it.”
That was until two months ago when she experienced a relapse. Instead of facing any barriers to entry, she found she could “easily” walk into and use poker machines at the venues she had excluded herself from.
“Over time I entered every venue within a three-hour walking radius of where I live,” Hughes says, adding she could easily enter more than 170 of the 175 venues she had excluded herself from. “Less than a few asked me to leave.”
Hughes, who has lost hundreds of thousands of dollars between pokies and online gambling and who was sentenced to 10 months in prison in 2020 for fraud to fund it, says: “It’s up to the venue staff to actually ask you to leave, to recognise you.
“And if you can’t provide ID to prove you’re not on the list, they’re meant to still ask you to leave, and police can actually be called. But I have been able to say to them; ‘My name isn’t Bree,’ or ‘I forgot my ID’ and they have just blatantly accepted that.
“It led to a full-blown relapse, once I saw how easy it was.”
Hughes isn’t alone. This year, the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission (VGCCC) has received 33 complaints from self-excluded people who were nonetheless able to gamble at a hotel or club. “We are continuing to investigate most of these complaints,” the VGCCC spokesperson said.
The commission has a number of disciplinary actions it can take against venues for repeated self-exclusion program breaches, including cancellation or suspension of the venue operator’s licence and heavy fines.
Despite that, the VGCCC told Guardian Australia no disciplinary action has ever been taken against any non-casino venue operator for letting excluded patrons into their gaming areas.
While the VGCCC fined the casino Crown Melbourne $2m in October for allowing 242 people who had self-excluded from gambling to place bets over an eight-month period, no such action has been taken against Victoria’s 486 clubs and hotels which between them house more than 27,300 poker machines.
Poker machine losses in Victoria reached more than $3bn in 2022-23.
A spokesperson for Victoria’s Department of Justice and Community Safety said a review into self-exclusion is under way. “Further consultation with gambling harm experts, hotels and clubs is required to finalise the review and what can be improved,” the spokesperson said.
Because venue self-exclusion list data is held by Community Clubs Victoria (CCV) and the Australian Hotels Association (AHA) Victoria – which also run the self-exclusion program – the government has no data about the number of people on the exclusion list or the number of breaches reported by venues.
Neither AHA Victoria nor CCV responded to requests for comment from Guardian Australia.
While the venue keeps any money lost by an excluded patron, it doesn’t have to pay out any winnings to someone on the exclusion list.
Hughes says she is frustrated by the barriers those harmed by gambling continue to face even once they ask for help. A person harmed by gambling who self-excludes has to list the name and address of each of the 486 venues they wish to be excluded from.
Dr Simone McCarthy, a gambling harms researcher with Deakin University’s faculty of health, says: “While self-exclusion in venues and BetStop – the national self-exclusion register for online wagering – are effective for some people, we do hear from people in our research that have found these ineffective.”
“The current self-exclusion programs put the onus on the individual to self-identify as being harmed by gambling and does nothing to prevent the harm from happening in the first place.”
Similar concerns have been raised about the self-exclusion program in NSW.
“We also see many examples of the gambling industry sending out promotions to people who have self-excluded and the current fine for punishment isn’t significant enough for the harm this is likely to cause,” McCarthy says.
There are few other legal products that have such recognised potential to cause harm that they have self-exclusion mechanisms, she says.
“We need to be doing more to hold the gambling industry accountable for their role in causing harm to communities and we need to ensure that people aren’t encouraged to gamble everywhere they look including through advertising and the availability of poker machines in the community.”
When Guardian Australia called the exclusion line numbers listed for the AHA Victoria and CCV on Melbourne Cup day, both went through to voicemail. A pre-recorded message on the Community Clubs Victoria line described the exclusion program as “highly effective”.
Hughes scoffs at this.
“It’s just, it’s an absolute joke,” she says. “I realised that absolutely nothing [significant] happens to you or the venue if you breach the exclusion.”
The few times a venue did report her to the program for breaching, Hughes says she received an email from the program with a list of support services.
“There’s no phone call, there’s no actual intervention.
“But support is needed long before someone reaches breaking point and excludes themself. Because almost every single person using a pokie is there because they have an issue. No one enters a venue alone and sits at a machine because they’re having a bit of fun, and a good time. They’re suffering, and the government and the venues know it.”
Do you know more? melissa.davey@theguardian.com
