for early access to the latest igaming videos!
and get the latest igaming news first!
Australia’s long-awaited gambling reform bill is finally moving towards passage, but the legislation leaves some of the country’s biggest gambling risks largely untouched.
The federal government reached a deal with the Coalition this week to secure support for the Interactive Gambling Amendment (Gambling Reform) Bill. The package introduces new limits on gambling advertising, tighter measures against illegal gambling services and stronger enforcement powers.
It also adds restrictions on inducement-based marketing and creates a single opt-out system for people who do not want to receive online wagering advertising.
Those changes matter. But they are far narrower than the reforms recommended by the 2023 Murphy inquiry, which examined the damage caused by online gambling and reached agreement across political lines on all 31 of its recommendations.
The gap between those recommendations and the legislation now before Parliament is difficult to miss.
Advertising limits stop well short of a ban
Under the bill, television gambling advertising will face a daytime limit. Between 5am and 8:30pm, broadcasters will still be permitted to show up to three gambling advertisements an hour.
Radio restrictions are narrower still. A new ban applies only on school days and only for two hours each day.
The bill does impose stronger restrictions around live sporting events, including coverage delivered online. That is one of the more significant changes, given how closely gambling marketing has become tied to Australian sport.
But the overall approach remains a partial restriction rather than the comprehensive advertising ban proposed by the Murphy inquiry.
That inquiry called for gambling advertising across broadcast and online media to be eliminated over a three-year period. The staged approach was intended to give broadcasters and sporting organisations time to replace advertising income.
The federal government could have adopted a similar path. Instead, the bill sets limits without establishing a route towards a complete ban.
That distinction is important because gambling advertising is not simply a matter of visibility. The inquiry found that exposure helps normalise gambling, including among younger Australians, while advertising is associated with increased gambling losses.
Australia already has an unusually heavy gambling burden. Around one million people are estimated to either experience severe gambling harm themselves or live with someone who does. Many others lose amounts they cannot comfortably afford.
Legal gambling remains the bigger problem
The legislation also targets illegal gambling operators, with measures designed to make access more difficult and increase penalties and enforcement.
But much of the harm identified in Australia does not come from illegal services.
It comes from gambling products that are legal.
That makes the focus on illegal operators only one part of the problem. The more difficult question is how to reduce losses generated through mainstream products, particularly pokies and online betting.
Australia has the highest gambling losses per person in the world. Those losses have risen in almost every year since national reporting began in 1975.
The Senate inquiry examining the reform bill recommended that Parliament pass it. Yet the process also attracted 90 submissions, most of which argued that the proposed protections should be strengthened.
The government subsequently amended the bill after pressure from the Coalition, Greens and crossbench MPs. The Coalition deal brought inducement marketing restrictions into the package and added the online advertising opt-out system.
Two Coalition MPs still crossed the floor in opposition.
The bill is nevertheless expected to clear the Senate this week with support from the two major parties.
That political agreement gives the legislation a much clearer path through Parliament. It does not resolve the underlying policy dispute.
The reform left on the table
The Murphy inquiry had proposed an immediate ban on gambling inducements and a three-year transition towards a complete advertising ban across all media.
The legislation falls short on both fronts.
Inducements will face new restrictions, but most customers can still be exposed to forms of direct marketing and promotional activity that the inquiry wanted removed.
There is also no staged timetable taking television, radio and online gambling advertising towards zero.
That leaves Australia with a regulatory compromise rather than the broader overhaul Parliament was asked to consider.
The next question extends beyond Canberra. Gambling regulation is shared with the states, which control important parts of the market, particularly poker machines in pubs and clubs.
One measure that could change the equation is mandatory pre-commitment, with maximum loss limits for high-risk gambling products. A national system could apply to online gambling, while state governments could introduce equivalent protections for pokies.
The new federal bill does not establish that framework.
For the government, passing the legislation may close one of the most politically difficult gambling debates of recent years. But the underlying problem has not disappeared. Nor has the evidence that prompted the reform effort in the first place.
Source: theconversation.com
