It’s stating the obvious, but problem gamblers have a problem. They suffer from a horrible addiction – the same as alcoholics and druggies – that causes impulses they cannot resist and consequences that affect all those around them.

The rare Gillard-themed poker machine. Some say the cooked turkey is an analogy for both the government itself and its pokies policy.

Like all addicts, problem gamblers go to extreme lengths to get their fix. For 60 per cent, that involves committing a crime to get the cash to feed their habit.

A report by private corruption investigation group Warfield & Associates found poker machines were the most common way to gamble stolen money. The study found between 2008-10 a whopping $13 million was stolen to play the pokies.

In one of the most extreme cases a 50-year-old woman overpaid herself and made excessive superannuation contributions to the tune of $4.6 million. She was jailed for five years.

It begs the question, if problem gamblers are willing to risk jail by stealing, how on earth is a system where they set their own limit with a plastic card – a license to punt – going to help them?

They may be only able to afford to $5 a week but under Labor’s extreme policy they will be able to set their limit as high as they want, say $200, or $1,000 or even $10,000. Not really much help in deterring a problem gambler is it?

It’s like saying to an alcoholic, its okay to drink; you’ve just got to decide if you want a six-pack, a carton, or a keg. Or giving a speeder their license and saying, how fast to do you want to drive? 100km/h? 150km/h? 200km/h? You get the picture.

While not helping problem gamblers, the scary thing is this extreme policy – adopted by Labor to win Andrew Wilkie’s support to form Government – could actually cost their families more.

This is the expert evidence of Dr Sally Gainsbury, a post doctoral research fellow at the Centre for Gambling Education and Research at the Southern Cross University. Dr Gainsbury, one of the country’s leading experts in problem gambling, told the parliament’s Joint Select Committee on Gambling Reform:

“There is some evidence that pre-commitment levels will actually increase gambling for problem gamblers, who will set higher limits to give themselves a buffer zone and then end up actually spending more because they are changing their own mindsets of how much they have to spend. So another potential consequence is actually increasing gambling amongst certain problem gamblers.”

Labor’s policy gets worse though. Dr Gainsbury told the committee if a card was introduced problem gamblers will ‘come up with ways around them.’
So the pathological problem gamblers - that desperately need our help - will continue to gamble while recreational players will shy away from handing over their personal details and signing up to Labor’s Orwellian scheme.

The result is revenue at pubs and clubs will fall, the services they offer - such as sponsoring local sports teams, community groups and students and building and maintaining local sporting fields - will be slashed and thousands employed by the industry will lose their job.

While the scheme is yet to be implemented, its effects are already being felt. The Twin Towns Services Club on the NSW/Qld border has already cancelled $50 million in development and laid off staff. Many more clubs - including NRL power house the Brisbane Broncos - have told the committee their future will be in jeopardy if Labor’s scheme is implemented.

The other problem is if Labor commits to pre-commitment it will shift the focus – and more importantly funding – away from the current measures that have helped reduced the rate of problem gambling.

Professor Alex Blaszczynski, Director of the Gambling Treatment Clinic and Research Unit at the University of Sydney, has the same fear and told the committee:

“My concern is that there is going to be a vast amount of money allocated to pre-commitment and its implementation at the cost of other interventions that may in fact be more effective - providing signage, providing linkages with treatment and so forth.”

Despite all this clear and compelling evidence Labor is charging full steam ahead with this policy. Move over Labor’s failed pink batts scheme, its rip-off school halls, its failed cash for clunkers, its failed grocery watch and fuel watch because mandatory pre-commitment will soon be challenging you for the title of Labor’s biggest stuff up.

There is no doubt something has to be done to help problems gamblers – however this extreme policy is not the answer. It’s the ransom demand of a rogue MP – and Julia Gillard and Labor are prepared to pay what ever the cost in order to cling to power. Though their grip is slipping and Labor MPs know it.

It will be a death blow to a number of us,” one nervous Labor MP recently told the Daily Telegraph.

65 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Against the Man says:

      06:43am | 27/04/11

      Oh we have jumped on to gambling now. Wonderful all those other issues - asylum seeker, home insulation deaths, carbon tax missing details, health care etc must have all been solved by the plain packaging on cigarettes.

      So we have a rough minority politician pulling the puppet strings, yawn….if Bobby Brown can do it with his eyes closed this really isn’t impressive.

      So MPs think this will be a death blow? Too funny, did you actually think this immoral Gilltard actually gives a hoot about anyone but herself.

      Juliar will be sipping wine with her boyfriend at the Royal wedding and laughing her guts out at all Australians - she has screwed us all really good and having the last laugh at our expense…..........

      Oh and pissing off the Chinese, classic.

    • John A Neve says:

      08:05am | 27/04/11

      AtM,

      On reading your latest offering, it is obvious you hve not taken your medication yet today!
      Don’t you ever get sick of posting child like rubbish?

    • Rosie says:

      08:40am | 27/04/11

      Correct, will this Govt ever finish anything off? Juliar Gillard keeps us guessing because every week the introduction of on the run half baked issues. Gambling is an issue to please none other the self serving Andrew Wilkie

      Ironical, that she is in China talking human rights while we detain asylum seekers in over crowding detention centres and the gap between ourselves and our indigenous is in no way narrowing.

      We all agree that glambers should be helped and the first thing that should be done is to entice gamblersto be honest with themselves and admit that they are addicted glamblers and need the support of families, friends and the Govt to fix their addiction. Waste of money, time and energy to fulfil Wilkie’s stupid idea.

      When Juliar comes back from her trip they will be another half baked issue introduced to fool the public that her trip was beneficial to the nation. It will an oriental issue, more in line of helping the Chinese than Australia as she loves impressing countries like China and the US.

    • Flexo says:

      09:13am | 27/04/11

      John A Neve, it really is time for you to grow up.

      This policy isn’t going to have an impact on gambling, people who are addicted are not going to be swayed by the changes.

    • John A Neve says:

      11:20am | 27/04/11

      Flexo,

      Says, “this policy is not going to have an impact on gambling” and I agree.
      As I’ve stated before, I support the pokies, the cheap meals, cheap drinks, free entertainment and clean toilets. Go forth and gamble I’ll enjoy the benefits.

      As to it being time for me to “grow up” Flexo, I’ll let that slide, as based on your posts, you must be shorter than AtM.

    • Against the Man says:

      01:44pm | 27/04/11

      Thanks John love your pointless statements, makes me look real good. Especially when you agree with me, cause you couldn’t deny my points.

      Oh and thanks for the backup Flexo but I’m not offended my John A, he is a little bit off and he makes really pointless statements all the time, the boy has neither the brains nor the bollocks to win an arguments and ends up making me look good smile

      Oh John, please keep posting, what pathetic response will you give us next!

      John, if the unions and her own MPs are up in arms, don’t you think your blind support for Gilltard is a little misplaced unless you are really a paid mole?

    • John A Neve says:

      02:52pm | 27/04/11

      AtM,
      We learn more about you all the time!
      Based on your latest post you are narcistic as well as repetitive!! No, not really, one only has to read your posts to know you love you. “Making me look good”, it would take more than me to make you look good.
      Keep posting, I love your puerile approach to life.

    • Drew says:

      11:41pm | 27/04/11

      Why do these articles not state the vested interest of the author as other media outlets do? Unless you click on the tiny little font of the author’s name (nobody ever does) then you’d never know that this author is a Liberal MP. What happened to transparency?

    • A concerned husband says:

      08:40am | 08/12/11

      No matter what you do, you will not stop an addict unless you take away every opportunity - pokies, racing etc. Once my wife steps into or gets near a hotel with pokies there is no restraining her and any attempt to take her away ends up in a fight. She will tell me before and tell me again after that she will never play again, but once she sees the pokies sign there is no stopping her. Make the place unattractive, take away the music unless you win more than you put in, limit to $1.00 will help but not necessarily stop the urge.

    • Toady says:

      06:48am | 27/04/11

      Gambling addiction!  What rubbish.  Weak people - that’s all it is.  Throw the criminals who steal to support their ‘habit’ in jail.

    • Confused Fuddy Duddy says:

      08:41am | 27/04/11

      Toady I think you’ll find that when these “Weak people” are caught and found guilty they are punished commensurate with their crime, that does indeed include throwing them in jail.
      The tenet of your post does pose doubt as to the effectiveness of a Law to limit these “Weak people’s gambling. They are breaking Laws to gamble, is another Law going to limit their gambling?

    • michael j says:

      09:35am | 27/04/11

      @toady-How about about throw the greedy capitalist grubs who make the machines,and the grubs who go out of their way to Steal peoples money by offering incentives to get them play their machines, grubs that prey on the week belong in jail when they make people commit crimes to satisfy their addiction,,,pokie’s should be banned,,,,
      @Confused,,F,D   another law will work,,ban the bloody things,,,

    • Toady says:

      10:01am | 27/04/11

      Hey Michael J, let’s ban television advertising too.  It leads to people eating junk food and increased obesity, it encourages people to buy things they can’t afford without going into debt, leading to increased poverty.  Let’s ban Gold Lotto too, so pensioners don’t waste their money and can afford to pay for their electricity.  We should probably ban liquor outlets while we’re at it, so we can eliminate problems associated with drinking.  Next should be horse racing because it leads to punting.  But the big one should be banning elections now that we have Bob Brown and Labor running the country with the help of the Independents.  Our country would be much better off if we let the quasi-dictators run the joint and control everything we do.

      I don’t think there is such a thing as gambling addiction.  And until the Brown-led ALP government bring in laws to control my opinion, that will be my opinion.

    • Gary says:

      07:31pm | 27/04/11

      Toady,no such thing as gambling addiction?So anyone who admits to being a gambling addict are lying,are they?Three or so years ago my mortgage was comfortably under control,and l was being pursued by a large financial organisation about buying investment properties.Then my wife discovered the joy of playing poker machines of her own free will.l am currently about three months behind our mortgage repayments and in an arrangement with the bank.This clearly has never happened to you,and l hope for your sake it doesnt.Everyone is entitled to express their opinion,but it is best to keep it to subjects you have some knowledge of.

    • persephone says:

      07:40am | 27/04/11

      Firstly, the proposed cards do more than just set a limit. They monitor a gambler’s playing patterns. This information is then used to determine if someone IS a problem gambler or not, and enables those with a problem to be targetted.

      Secondly, Gainsbury isn’t against the card. She’s against it being seen as the only solution - and I don’t think anyone is arguing it is.

      Finally, there’s no doubt something has to be done to help problem gamblers - but you obviously haven’t any idea what, and haven’t been bothered to put in the same amount of research into this as you have to collect information to can the proposal on the table.

      In other words, you’re more interested in criticising than in finding a solution.

      Which suggests that your real concern isn’t helping problem gamblers, but in attacking the government.

    • Adam Diver says:

      09:10am | 27/04/11

      “They monitor a gambler’s playing patterns”

      Nanny state, wait even better, Labor Nanny state, wait I can go one better Independent controlled Labor Nanny State.

      Can’t wait till Labor monitors my internet habits and tells me what I can look at (or doesn’t tell me what I can’t look at)...oh wait.

      How about Labor focus on economic reforms and budget restraint, the US debt is looking increasingly shaky. 

      And on that note local councils stick to roads, parks and rubbish if you would be so kind. Middle east politics is probably a slight over-reach of not only your duties but also your abilities.

    • Tails says:

      09:49am | 27/04/11

      The only way to stop a problem gambler from gambling is to take away their ability to gamble.
      A better reform would be to work in conjunction with the “addict’s” bank. You’d get the same information on their playing patterns because you could see where, when and how often they take money out of their accounts.
      Then you can start setting significantly lower daily ‘cash out’ limits on your ATM card.
      It won’t stop you from buying groceries, paying bills or anything like that. But it will stop you from draining cash out of your bank account when you’re not thinking clearly.
      It might be an invasion of privacy, but it’ll help real problem gamblers more than a self regulated system.

    • persephone says:

      09:50am | 27/04/11

      Adam

      er, what?

      Labor is focussing on economic reformsa nd budget restraint.

      You’re just not used to a government that’s capable of doing more than one thing at a time.

      As for the local council references, what have they got to do with anything I’ve written??

    • Adam Diver says:

      12:37pm | 27/04/11

      Why does everything have to do with you Perse? I was merely pointing out the similarities in poor governments after I made my initial point regarding your Nanny state support.

      “Labor is focussing on economic reformsa nd budget restraint.”

      Thats a lie, unless you consider taxing everything possible economic reform?

      I have yet to see Labor do one thing, let alone more than one thing at a time. And by extension I don’t want a government focusing on economic security by multi-tasking with every pointless environmental and social debate possible.

    • persephone says:

      01:15pm | 27/04/11

      Adam

      Sorry, it was the way you headed the post ‘persephone’ and your repeated use of the word ‘you’ - as if, you know, you were referring to me - that confused me.

      Re reading it, I can see that that’s just a result of your inability to express yourself clearly.

      Oh dear. Here’s Rosie complaining that the government is trying to do too many things at once, and you complain that they’re not doing anything. Which is it?

      As for economic reform, the carbon price is designed to change our economy, which is a fairly biggie right there.

      And then there’s the mining tax.

      These things go beyond just imposing taxes, because they’re aimed to do other things as well.

      Economic reforms do seem to have a lot to do with taxation systems, because taxes, the way they’re imposed and the way their revenue is spent, is a big economic driver.

      I’d be interested if you can name an economic reform that didn’t have impacts on the tax system.

      (And, btw, even with the mning tax and carbon pricing, the tax burden on the average Australian citizen is forecast to be less than it was three or four years ago).

    • Ben G says:

      04:07pm | 27/04/11

      Adam Diver, are you aware that you’re simultaneously complaining that you haven’t seen the government do anything AND that you’re afraid they’re taking control of everything? You’re all over the place mate, I’m no fan of this government but Persephone is running rings around you on this one.
      Bow out gracefully.

    • John C says:

      07:58am | 27/04/11

      Some people are addicted to gambling, others to drinking, smoking, whatever. The Prohibition era showed that banning alcohol did not work and the Rudd tax on fizzy alcoholic drinks may have brought in revenue but only switched the target group of young drinkers over to other things. The losing battle in the War against Drugs suggests that if people want to destroy their lives through drugs, they will at a cost to the community.; Smokers still smoke and could I suggest that the number of smokers are going down because of the punitive costs of smoking and the social exclusion.

      Punters who want to lose their money on machines will either sign up to big limits, use other peoples cards, or gamble online. The only way to help them reduce their losses is not by bringing in a scheme that smacks of further intrusions into the freedoms of the rest of us but by introducing more univeral measures like a) increasing the proportion that machines must return to players and b) limiting the amount per play; say 10 cents or 20 cents a roll, and a maximum multiplier of say 5.

    • John says:

      12:26pm | 27/04/11

      John C interesting point about drug addcition. Few years ago I read about a survey done by a group in America. The group asked college students if they used drugs and what type. They then asked those who said they used drugs that were linked and known to be funding Al Quida activities such as heroine a simple question. Will you continue to use the drug knowing that it will be used to fund attacks on US troops in afghanistan and iraq, the majority if the answer was yes they will continue take the drugs even though it finances a group who is killing US soldiers. This shows that yes there is a loosing battle on drugs

    • CJ Morgan says:

      08:01am | 27/04/11

      I really don’t understand why anybody would want to throw away their money by playing pokies.  However, it’s always been easy to part fools from their money and numerous people seem to enjoy it for some reason I can’t fathom.  Mind you, gambling’s about the only vice I’ve never had… so I wouldn’t deny punters the right to behave stupidly.

      What I think is a worse ‘addiction’ is the one that clubs and pubs have developed for fleecing their patrons through these idiotic machines.  If they’re not viable without them, something is seriously wrong.

    • acotrel says:

      08:23am | 27/04/11

      Do we really need pokies?  In Mansfield there are two beautiful pubs which supply excellent meals, all built without pokies. How do the pokies contribute to productivity?  What value do they add? They would have to be the most antisocial invention of all time!

    • marley says:

      08:46am | 27/04/11

      I agree entirely.  I loathe the damn things, and the tacky atmosphere around them.  And I’m at a bit of a loss to understand how they were allowed to become so pervasive in Australia.

    • Joel B1 says:

      08:49am | 27/04/11

      At one stage the ALPs biggest revenue was from pokies. (search that lefty site Crikey)

      And surely the time to worry about pokies/no-pokies is at the “do we let clubs etc have pokies” stage not now after they’ve been permitted. Incidentally by a Labor government here in Tassie.

    • Adam Diver says:

      09:16am | 27/04/11

      I just was reading teh anual budget for a large club in my area. With two great golf courses the pokies bought in 6 times the revenue of the golf courses combined. What is crazier is that this was before cost were taken out for the maintenence and running of two golf courses. I didnt do the maths but on a profit V profit it seems those low maintenance machines are 20 times more profitable than 2 golf courses.

    • ShamWow says:

      01:48pm | 27/04/11

      It’s all about the money, my local RSL club is nothing but pokies. If clubs and pubs could stay afloat without pokie revenue there would be pubs and clubs without pokies.

    • facepalm says:

      02:09pm | 27/04/11

      Pubs and clubs seem to be doing just fine without pokies over here in Perth, Shamwow. It’s just a case of greedy proprietors seeing nothing but dollar signs. They probably *could* get by without them, they just don’t *want* to. For the owners, it’s easy money - I imagine most pokie punters don’t drink as much (not after emptying their wallets into one of those infernal contraptions), so alcohol-related violence is probably less of an issue. A friend of mine who moved here from Sydney last year loves the complete absence of pokies in pubs and clubs, as it means a much better live music scene.

    • Dave-o says:

      08:33am | 27/04/11

      Yeah signage really works. There’s stickers on every machine and always in the eye catching position above the urinal, but funny enough they don’t seem to be working either.

      Pathological gamblers will find their way around any system, that’s why their pathological.

    • Joel B1 says:

      08:42am | 27/04/11

      Like I said about the Phat Card, a national mandatory pre-commitment to a calorific level by children to curb excessive fattyness, the chompers, or in this case the gamblers will do work-arounds.

      In the case of the Phat Card skinny little kids will hang around outside Maccas and hire out their underutilised Phat Card to bigger kids who’ve blown their pre-commitment level.

      Same sort of thing will happen with the Gamblers Card.

      And as usual with a Labor government the focus has shifted from helping people with a serious problem to blaming those same people.

      Ten minutes thought about problem gambling will throw up three or four potential solutions that reduce the problem not stigmatise the person.

    • Mahhrat says:

      08:59am | 27/04/11

      The result is revenue at pubs and clubs will fall, the services they offer - such as sponsoring local sports teams, community groups and students and building and maintaining local sporting fields - will be slashed and thousands employed by the industry will lose their job.

      Now, those employed is an argument, but I reckon if you ask a lot of community events if they were happy to accept the money off the back of problem gamblers, the answer would be no.

      You can’t bring joy from pain like this, it just isn’t right.

    • FWG says:

      09:00am | 27/04/11

      make them all 50c limit and slow them down as in the U,K is the best way to solve problem.they should never have been allowed to be put in pubs it totally ruined them. and dont forget to thank the Labor govt for allowing them in the first place.

    • Mahhrat says:

      09:20am | 27/04/11

      I like this idea, but it would force gambling underground is my concern.

    • Robert says:

      11:36am | 28/04/11

      This is by far the best solution, simply limit the amount that can be passed through them. Pokies are so addictive to some because of the instant gratification they give. Limit the machines to a bet of 50c a minute. So if you are playing a machine that allows a $2 bet it will be 4 minutes before you can hit the button again. Play $20 on a $1 machine and it’s forty minutes before that machine can be played again.

      This would at least slow the problem players down. As for all the other “I enjoy playing but don’t have a problem” people should not have a problem with this if they are only playing for fun.

      occasionally I will put $5 in a machine and get bored after tow or three goes, so don’t care if they go altogether.

    • Not so sure says:

      05:08pm | 29/04/11

      From what I understand the rate of problem gamblers in the UK is rising and is nearly twice the rate of NSW.

    • Thomas Cummings says:

      09:29am | 27/04/11

      Ciobo has a vested interest in opposing these reforms. Even though a member of the committee to investigate a solution, he has been strongly opposed to everything that the government supports. He is playing political games with people’s lives.

      Ciobo ignores the detail of the proposed reforms, preferring instead to parrot the slogan of the clubs and pubs (“a licence to punt”). The proposal is to drop the maximum bet and payout amounts on the majority of poker machines, while still leaving them freely available to be played WITHOUT card; and incorporate pre-commitment on the rest of the higher-spending, higher-paying poker machines.

      It is a two-tier system. Clubs and pubs will be able to decide how many of each kind of poker machine they want; players will be able to play poker machines without a card; and anyone who wants to spend more can get a card and play the high-intensity machines.

      What Ciobo fails to understand is the mindset of the problem gambler. What he ignores is that these reforms are NOT designed to allow problem gamblers to gamble safely; they are designed to PREVENT problem gambling behaviours from developing in the first place, and to minimse the harm that problem gamblers can cause to themselves and others.

    • Not so sure says:

      05:17pm | 29/04/11

      Two things; the ‘low intensity’ idea, has this been costed and considered?  In the UK the rate of problem gambling with similar machines is growing and nearly twice the rate of NSW.  Also, at what cost to the venues?  What chance the pokie player going online to gamble?  In Norway, the pokies disappeared for over a year as they implemented mandatory pre commitment.  Guess what, the rate of problem gambling remained despite zero pokies.  Where did they go…online.  Read about it at http://www.sintef.no/uploadpages/218303/a8499.pdf (see page 3)

    • Tax and More Tax says:

      09:46am | 27/04/11

      We have a cleaver Government ! Introduce/Allow the Pokies to the country, now puting a rule to stop them (nice name—reform).

      About this gambling habit—same as Government’s wastful expenditure, and then put in the nice name—levey, tax.

      I wonder if we are in recession now, we may have to pay for the recession levey to support all the fat cats and keep them running in the Parliament houe.

    • non-gambler says:

      10:00am | 27/04/11

      If assisting problem gamblers, expand the regulations to other betting cash cows- lotteries lotto, casinos, human participant sport,  dish lickersand the big ticket item, the nags. I think the pokies are a soft target in the debate regarding the least able being bled by gambling because of the direct visibility of the dollars going down the drain (to end up in the sump of consolidated revenue). Bearing in mind that for the people who have become seduced by the hope of winning are not quarantining their gambling behaviour to the pokies, one must assume that it would be all to much to the Ozzie tradition of larrikin punting for the rich and powerful, especially in the horse racing industry, to be in the spotlight.

    • Paul says:

      10:05am | 27/04/11

      How about the pokie clubs establish their own in-house programs of support for problem gamblers? They know full well who they are. In an ideal world, the idealists (Wilkie, Gillard, Greens etc) dream of a card-in-the-slot to end problem gambling is just that, an impossible dream.
      You cannot legislate against stupidity, but you can educate.

    • Markus says:

      10:51am | 27/04/11

      “You cannot legislate against stupidity”
      I’m struggling to think of the last new regulation introduced (or subsidy, to be honest) that wasn’t aiming to save stupid people from themselves.

    • TracyH says:

      10:30am | 27/04/11

      I hate pokies in pubs…because being pissweak… always blow 30$...If I wanted to play them before…I’d go to the club. But mostly, I hate them full stop because I’ve seen the damage they cause having worked in clubs many years ago. In WA there are NO POKIES and everyone manages to survive…sporting clubs, hospitality employment, the whole state MANAGES without them. But yeah ,...I know the resources revenue tops the coffers of the state govt. However, I still have huge admiration for the rejection of pokie, despite IMMENSE pressure from self interested groups.

    • TracyH says:

      10:30am | 27/04/11

      I hate pokies in pubs…because being pissweak… always blow 30$...If I wanted to play them before…I’d go to the club. But mostly, I hate them full stop because I’ve seen the damage they cause having worked in clubs many years ago. In WA there are NO POKIES and everyone manages to survive…sporting clubs, hospitality employment, the whole state MANAGES without them. But yeah ,...I know the resources revenue tops the coffers of the state govt. However, I still have huge admiration for the rejection of pokie, despite IMMENSE pressure from self interested groups.

    • BobL says:

      10:43am | 27/04/11

      I saw a review over the weekend on the real cost of waging a war, taking into account the costs over the 25 years after the war ended, and the conclusion was that no country can afford a war, and the victor is not always the ultimate winner. The same exercise should be undertaken for pokies. The problem gambler is a minority, yet it appears the Govt will sacrifice all the good work done by the sports clubs, welfare organisations and the RSL clubs, with their share of the profits, just to win a battle(Albeit a skirmish) with a tinpot dictator that is not even popular in his own electorate.(2% first preferences). The only real winners will be large club owners, who have the capital to weather the storm, and the real estate agents who get to sell off the assets of the community clubs who go broke. The real victims of this war, the problem gamblers, will still not address their problem, they will just find another outlet, horse racing or tattslotto or just go to the casino with 6 or more ID cards they bought on E Bay.

    • MM says:

      10:45am | 27/04/11

      This is an intervention that has been discussed in the gambling sector for 20 years.  It is nothing new to anyone in the sector.  It has been implemented in other countries with some success.  It is true that it will not help problem gamblers who have no real intention of reducing or stopping their gambling.  It can, however, help those who recognize that they’re developing a problem and still have the capacity to use methods to control their spending.  No one intervention will help all gamblers.  It just doesn’t exist.  Instead, the gov will have to use some of the tens of billions it collects from gamblers to implement multiple strategies that will prevent and treat problem gambling.  Plus, ignore the venues - they have more than enough money to introduce such a scheme.  Local small clubs should be supported by the gov, as they always are when they want to expand or upgrade pokies (they do this regularly).  This is but one such intervention with potential to do good.  P.S. THIS IS NOT A LICENSE.

    • Gladys says:

      11:15am | 27/04/11

      It does make you wonder if these limits will make gamblers think: ok. My limit is $200 and I’m up to $190 I’ll just get it to $200, but I’m late going back to work anyway… oh, I’ll do it. It’s not going over the limit.

      It’s a forgiveness or a tolerance a gambling addict shouldn’t be getting.

      It might work on those who admit they’ve got a problem but how many have identified themselves as gambling addicts compared with those in denial?

      I’m a Queenslander so I know states can do very well without gaming machines. I think we should get rid of them completely.

    • Darragh Scully says:

      11:23am | 27/04/11

      I despise Pokies.

      Melbourne v West Coast

    • Rossco says:

      11:53am | 27/04/11

      The pathetic Labor Nanny State strikes again.

      I like to play pokies occasionally. By occasionally I mean 2-3 times a year betting maybe a max of 20-50 bucks at a time. I do not have a gambling problem.

      So why should my privacy be invaded and I have to sign up for this card for this ridiculous nanny state control?

      Are they also going to introduce it into casinos where international guests and tourists roam? Are we going to tell these people they need to have a card as well? Some people wont bother. Hotels will lose out, mainly by those without any gambling problems who will be reluctant to give out their details and sign up for this card.

      This is just ridiculous. I am sick of this government.

    • Dave-o says:

      04:29pm | 27/04/11

      Mis-information much.

      You wont need a pre-commitment card, it wasn’t Labor’s policy it was Wilkie’s that Labor and the independents support. Also problem gamblers already give out their personal details to rewards schemes then duitfully stick those cards in the machine

    • Jason says:

      12:17pm | 27/04/11

      I describe my self as a small l liberal, but on pokies they are a menace, they must be destroyed. They destroy families, they leave children starving and they drive people from good citizens, mothers and fathers to criminals.

    • Thirsty says:

      12:57pm | 27/04/11

      A couple of points/suggestions

      A pokie addict is simply that, addicted to pokies, not a gambling addict per se. They are addicted to pokies because of the anonomous nature of the punt…they dont have to go to a register to place their ticket.
      An easy solution to problem pokie players is to make all pokies run on tokens purchased at a counter, from a real person. This way, the player has to face another human being to buy the credits, thus, they lose their anonomous status. This will stop many problem pokie players straight up, as someone will see how much they are gambling
      Another point, TAB outlets now let you place bets using a machine, without the human interface. This will, and is, allowing problem gamblers to continue their destructive behaviour because they are suddenly invisable to other humans. The only way to stop problem gamblers is to take away their invisable habits, that way, it is easier to identify them, as well as offer help to those who want/need it

    • Geoff - Brisbane says:

      01:12pm | 27/04/11

      Is it any suprise that a guy who idolises hitler (willkie) wants to control who spends what and when?

    • sludger says:

      01:25pm | 27/04/11

      I lived in Melbourne for a while, and what I enjoyed that not every pub had pokies.  This was great as after work we could have a quiet beer and relax without hearing the damn things.  And I admit, if they are there and I hae a few sherbets, i can end up throwing 20 or 30 bucks in them.  Okay, maybe I am weak, my problem.  But why are they in the pubs anyway?  Why not keep the things in clubs or, better still, be like WA where you have to make a decision and drive to the casino to play.  I like that!  But all that aside, I am very against this card business.  However, if I read it right, if I am only playing small bets of about 50 cents I don’t need a card. I can live with that.

    • Steve says:

      02:26pm | 27/04/11

      $13 Million over 2 years of which one person accounted for $4.6 Million. That is a problem but what I call a small problem. It tells me that most addicts don’t steal to feed their gambling habit. The real problem is the food not on the table, the missed mortgage, the unpaid bills.

    • stevem says:

      02:36pm | 27/04/11

      the real problem is that one man (Wilkie) has dictated government policy on this matter. He has made it very clear he will bring down the government if it does not introduce HIS precommitment card. He doesn’t care if it’s the best way to protect problem gamblers. He doesn’t care about the cost of implementation, the effectiveness or the practicality of his solution.

      I have no idea if the scheme will work, although it seems to have its loopholes. I’m sure there are studies and experts that should be consulted on these matters, but that would be an affront to Wilkie and cannot be pursued.

      Wilkie’s intransigence and the governments pandering to him are the real problems here.

    • Outraged says:

      02:39pm | 27/04/11

      Bar/Casino staff need to be given more power to throw out problem gamblers!

      When you train to get your RSA (Responsible Service of Alcohol Certificate), you are taught you ARE allowed to stop serving people who have had to much to drink and refuse service to problem drinkers….but when you study for your RCG (Gaming Certificate) you are told bar staff are NOT allowed to stop serving people who gamble too much and you have to let them keep gambling until THEY ask to be refused service?! Why the double-standard? If bar staff see someone sitting at a pokie for 7+ hours…we should be allowed to go up to them and ask them to leave/say they have gambled too much today!

    • TC says:

      04:35pm | 27/04/11

      Australia’s biggest addiction problem is the addiction of some to call others addicts

    • Bikinis On Top says:

      06:45pm | 27/04/11

      At least Tim Costello can get poker machine reform from Labor.He couldn’t get that assurance even from his own brother.
      Blood is not thicker than water.

    • Dave C says:

      08:07pm | 27/04/11

      I am a social conservative LNP supporter who normally has the view that Government should keep out of our lives and that too much government regulation is a bad thing. I also think Wilkie is a smart arsed cunning little sod who plays his politics very hard and who is on a power trip in everything he does. I also play the pokies every now and then and set myself a limit of how much I want to to lose and then I walk away….....BUT…..

      I read stories of people who dont have the will power to walk away and lose so much money that they then lose their house or car and then their family. I worked with a guy (not closely but none the less we knew each other at work) who lost his house, his marriage and then killed himself due to gambling addiction. So for those reasons I support Wilkies proposal. If someone has a problem let them voluntarily help themselves by setting their own limits and use a card.

    • Louisa says:

      09:23pm | 27/04/11

      Dave C

      Your friend may have also had a problem with drinking at home - so would you support everyone having a limit on how much they can drink at home?

    • Barry says:

      09:09pm | 27/04/11

      The poker machine lobby will scream that the sky will fall in. I feel clubs that support golf or lawn bowls should be given some help because of their link to the extended community. Many of the bigger clubs spend more on making their clubs more grandiose than looking after their members.
      If the poker machine lobby were fair dinkum about problem gambling they would have already identified and helped these sad people. Instead the clubs and pubs are full of glossy signs about how they can help problem gamblers.
      I totally support both Andrew Wilkie and Nick Xenophon in their bid to stop the influence of poker machines and to reduce the negative impact these machines have on thousands of families.
      By the way I am a member of 5 clubs but do not like the influence of poker machines on my community.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

@ToryShepherd there's always time for Din Tai Fung.

ToryShepherd

@drpiotrowski will be there just in time for Din Tai Fung

Daniel Piotrowski

@ToryShepherd I hope that's in your piece tomorrow. Also - are you coming over this week or laaaaaater?

ToryShepherd

@drpiotrowski yes, Snowtown Abbey should be given an entirely segregated feed...

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Deep down we’re all unionists, even the haters

Deep down we’re all unionists, even the haters

Bill Kelty made a memorable speech last week. Addressing the ACTU Congress Dinner in Sydney, the legendary…

Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia…

Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia…

Speaking of yourself in the third person is usually a sign that you’re suffering from delusions…

South Australia. It’s the middle bottom bit.

South Australia. It’s the middle bottom bit.

If South Australia had just arrived in the world, red and wrinkled and mewling, what would we call it?…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

241 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter