Gambling reform has become a major issue of tension for the government as it prepares to respond to a cross-party committee inquiry led by former Labor member, the late Peta Murphy.
The inquiry’s report, released last year, unanimously recommended a ban on gambling advertising within three years.
There is strong public and backbench support within Labor for a ban, but the government fears the consequences it would have on free-to-air TV. It is set to release a compromise position within weeks.
Joining the podcast is Independent member for Clark, Andrew Wilkie. Wilkie has advocated for gambling reform during his entire political career, including falling out with then-Prime Minister Julia Gillard over the issue of poker machines during her minority government.
Wilkie says gambling should be treated as a harmful product:
Any business in Australia, in any sector of the economy, that relies on peddling a dangerous product has a fundamentally flawed business model. So they should be prevented from peddling that dangerous product, and that will force them to re-engineer their business model.
It does have the effect of putting kids, in particular, on a pathway to early and prolonged gambling and, with that, a high rate of gambling addiction. So, I do regard it as a dangerous product, one that needs to have safeguards around it.
He says of the government’s claim a blanket advertising ban wouldn’t work and that the loss of revenue would affect free-to-air media:
I do note that the Peta Murphy inquiry didn’t envisage an immediate ban. It envisaged a phase-out over three years to give the industry time to transition to other forms of revenue. It may be necessary that in that period of time, there might need to be some government assistance. And I accept that because when governments make decisions that significantly change the landscape for an industry, then I think it’s fair enough for the government to step in and assist.
On why the government isn’t going further, Wilkie points to donations from gambling companies, as well as the government’s fear of the power they and other stakeholders can wield:
What we’ve got at the moment is that the gambling industry pays enormous amounts of donations, and frankly, they expect a return on that investment, and they often get a return on that investment.
Frankly, the government is scared stiff of the gambling companies, scared stiff of the media companies, and scared stiff of the large sports codes that also benefit from the gambling advertising and from the revenue from gambling occurring. I think it’s that simple.
On the likelihood of a hung parliament at the next election, Wilkie says:
I think it’s a very real prospect, yes, that we’re going back into a power-sharing parliament. And if it’s anything like the last one, that’ll be good for the country. Well, I know Julia Gillard and I had a terrible row over gambling reform [but] I’ll give her all the credit in the world for running a very stable and very productive Parliament.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
