Towards the end of the recent 4Corners report on James Packer’s gambling fortunes former PBL director Geoff Cousins gave his assessment of the casino game.

Not productive, not creating anything, just a hole to shove your money in

“They’re frankly just a horrible business,” Cousins said. “They live off the misfortunes of others and they are a completely non productive business. They don’t create anything, they just take people’s money and shove it down a hole and now and again if they’re forced to, they give a tiny bit of it back.”

It was an excellent summation that could equally be applied to the casino’s little brother: poker machines.

The Productivity Commission has released its draft report on gambling and it’s called for some measures it says will save Australian gamblers at least part of the $18 billion they lose each year.

According to the PC 15 per cent of Australian gamblers qualify as “problem gamblers,” and another 15 per cent are at some risk. The problem gamblers account for 40 per cent of the losses.

Pokie losses make up 65 per cent of the hard-earned Australians are shoving down that hole each year.

“While precision is impossible, estimates of the number of problem gamblers lie in a range around 125 000, with the estimated number of gamblers at moderate-risk ranging around 290,000,” the report said.

“Regular gaming machine players (those playing at least once a week) are estimated to spend around $7000–8000 per annum, a sizeable share of household incomes, and a key source of harm to some.”

The two key recommendations for poker machines are: reducing the speed the machines operate so people don’t lose money so quickly, and giving gamblers the opportunity to cap the amount of time and money they spend in advance of playing.

“Most recreational gamblers play at low intensity, but the machines allow losses of up to $1200 an hour,” said the PC. “The bet limit should be lowered to one dollar per button push (equating to losses of around $120 an hour), with much lower limits on how much cash can be fed into machines at any one time. Recreational players would be minimally affected.”

Other recommendations include limiting access to ATMs in gambling venues, shorter opening hours and more visible warnings.

They’re calling it “managed liberalisation” and I bet you $50 no Australian Government has the guts to introduce it.

As the PC draft report said: “Gambling taxes still amount to around 10 per cent of state and territory own tax revenue.”

The Federal Government wants to censor your internet, tell you what to feed your kids and tax your Bundy and Coke. And yet the solution to the hideous waste that is problem gambling in this country the answer is “managed liberalism.”

The Commission outlined a range of policy measures introduced by governments that have so far proved ineffective, including:

Short periods of machine shutdowns. These typically occur in the middle of the night. They allow premises to be cleaned and maintained, but produce few obvious
harm minimisation benefits
A lower maximum bet limit — from $10 to $5. That means that the value of bets laid per hour will have fallen from a maximum of $12 000 to $6 000. That entails a reduction in expected maximum player losses from $1200 to $600 an hour, which remains very high. (And some jurisdictions have maintained the limit at $10.)
A reduced value of notes that gamblers can insert at any one time into a machine from $100 to $50 — but retaining the capacity to insert note after note
Reduced cash input levels, such as from $10 000 to $1000. In this case, a player could still insert twenty $50 notes consecutively into the machine. (Again, some jurisdictions have retained the $10 000 limit.)
ATM withdrawal limits of $200 per transaction, but problem gamblers can go back time after time, subject to the normal arrangements they have with their banks
Mandatory clocks on machine displays, so people do not lose track of time. But most people have watches and they typically concentrate on the game.

All tried, and all failed.

Here’s an idea - how about less poker machines.

The PC even said the problem of poker machines bleeding our suburbs was a modern phenomenon brought about by the liberalisation of restrictions in the 90s, and has resulted in a triffid-like outbreak of the salary suckers in pubs all over the country, except WA.

“A criticism of gambling policy in the 1990s was that, despite international evidence about the risks of highly accessible gaming, governments did not apply a precautionary evidence-based approach to justify the extensive and rapid liberalisation of gambling that ensued,” it said (in brackets, as if it was an after thought).

So the less pokies strategy worked pre-90s, it could work again, if a Government has the guts to do it.

Don’t miss: Get The Punch in your inbox every day

Most commented

19 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • RT says:

      06:28am | 22/10/09

      I saw Mr Cousins make his comments and agreed. How is gambling, now legalised everywhere, morally superior to other prohibited things like taking certain drugs? Wouldn’t we be better either taking a consistent approach to all things that cause social harm: alcohol, drugs, gambling - and either tighten restrictions or liberalise them equally?
      I think it is difficult to say to young adults: ‘you musn’t take drugs but it’s OK to drink alcohol and pour money into poker machines designed to keep it.’  But that’s what we’re telling them, and we wonder why they don’t listen.

    • Warren says:

      06:58am | 22/10/09

      Incidentally, we don’t have pokies in pubs in the ACT - only in clubs, which cannot be comercially owned or operated.

      That said, fewer pokies would be a good thing, smaller bet limits and lower input limits would all be a positive step in reducing the impact that these machines have on problem gamblers, without making a large impact on average players.

      ATM limiting is much more complex, because, as you mention, there are pokies in every pub, so someone wanting to get cash out for non-gambling puroposes may be impacted by this step (which will be seen by most people as a method for maximising transaction fees for the non-bank ATMs that are often in pubs).

      Still, as usual from the PC, a range of thoughtful (though not groundbreaking) suggestions.

    • BMJ says:

      07:02am | 22/10/09

      Pokies are a cancer on society in my opinion. There’s calls out there for a zero tolerance approach for drink driving and all these wacky ideas to curb binge drinking but Pokies are far more destructive in my opinion.

    • AFR says:

      07:14am | 22/10/09

      Tory, there is a cap on pikie emtitlements in NSW, and every time a pub or club sells a block of three, they must surrender one of those, so the purchaser only receives two (subject to some exceptions). Almost every state and territory government has either doing something similar or currently looking into it.

      However, my main issue is not with your article, but with the comments from Geoff Cousins “They live off the misfortunes of others and they are a completely non productive business. They don’t create anything”. Depends on your definition I suppose. By this definition most of PBL’s business falls into this cateogry (unless you consider Womans Day to somehow be informative, and educational lol).

    • AFR says:

      07:23am | 22/10/09

      By the way - I should point out that I am by no means “pro pokies”, but like many forms of entertainment, most have a good time, with only a small number adversely affected. Of course we need to have measures in place to minimise harm, but I guess I just take an issue with the whole POKIES = BAD argument, which blinkered people like Xenophon continue to push.

    • SM says:

      07:58am | 22/10/09

      Poker machines are “entertainment”?  That’s laughable.  Have a look at their faces.  They’re not being entertained.  “Most have a good time”?  No, most lose their money.  The vast majority of people who play the machines, even if they play only once a week, have a gambling problem.  The only ones who don’t (and they’re a very small group) are those who are able to have a quick flutter, and then walk away. 

      And what on earth will “having less machines” do?  Walk into a club that has hundreds of machines.  Or walk into a pub that has 30.  They’re never all being played.

      Last year a work colleague of mine told me, somewhat ashamedly, that his parents, who are licensees of a pub here in Sydney, were investigated by the relevant gaming department for illegally “winding back” the machines in their venue so that they returned an even smaller amount back to players.  They were found guilty, and the department concluded that they’d been doing it for over a year.  The penalty?  A $50,000 fine, and no loss of licence.

    • AFR says:

      09:44am | 22/10/09

      Yes, SM, pokies are entertainment for a lot of people. If you are suggesting people who play them once a week have a problem, you need to then extend this to all forms of gambling. If so, there are millions upon millions of “problem” gamblers in this country, inxcluding those who play lotto, go into their local TAB, bet on the footy etc.

      BTW, pokies can be manipulated, but its certianly not easy to do and would be far from commonplace these days. Its not just a matter of opening them up and pushing a button. Pokies are so heavily regulated these days (and probably rightly so) - more so than selling booze. The only place where alcohol is more regulated, is that staff can refuse to serve someone alcohol once they have had too much.

      Anyway, i’m currently reading the report (well a summary of). It will be interesting to see its findings.

    • Pedro says:

      10:25am | 22/10/09

      We really are turning into the nanny country.

      Think i’ll just stay in bed till the government tell me what to do. No TV for the kids in the morning. They dont want brekky so thats ok they dont have to eat if they dont want to. Maybe i should not buy fod for them and just head down he pub and play the pokies, ooops can only spend $100.  can only have 3 beers while i am there or i am apparently an alcoholic. No fast food for lunch, its bad, the government wants us to live forever so we can live exciting action filled lives, as long as we do it THEIR way. So why is there an education revolution on when they dont want us to think for ourselves?

    • SM says:

      10:34am | 22/10/09

      I must disagree AFR.  Someone who plays Lotto once a week is certainly not a problem gambler.  People who play Lotto don’t use money that’s meant to be used on food or clothing or rent.  Nor do they “chase” losses. 

      In my view, whether someone is a “problem gambler” or not is determined by their attitude.  If the amount gambled has little or no bearing on their lifestyle, and if they can walk away after they’ve gambled these alloted funds, shrug their shoulders and move on, then it’s no problem.  That’s when it falls into the category of “entertainment”.

      The overwhelming majority of poker machine players don’t have that attitude

    • Cameron Price-Austin says:

      11:49am | 22/10/09

      Even if you reduce poker machine numbers by 50%, won’t that mean the problem gamblers will simply move to the remaining machines, leaving fewer machines available for recreational users?

      Raise the mandated rate of return from 85% to 95% (or higher). If pokies weren’t so profitable, there would be less incentive for casinos and pubs to have them.

    • DG says:

      12:18pm | 22/10/09

      “They live off the misfortunes of others” - No, you are thinking of Morticians and funeral Directors. Pokies live off human stupidity.

      There are plenty of area’s that thrive on the lack of knowledge of others, or their lack of skill or time. Pokies sell “hope” - just like religions and certain alternative medical practices. The chances of winning the jackpot on the pokies is no different to the chances of god hearing your prayers (Ever hear of the placebo effect) or come Witch Doctors curse causing heart disease (the curse may have a psycho-schematic effect).

      “they [pokies] just take people’s money and shove it down a hole and now and again if they’re forced to, they give a tiny bit of it back” - Again, No. People put their money down a hole in the hope that money will spew forth. Despite KNOWING that they will end up behind.

      Down at my local we refer to the pokies as the “tax room” - people pay their stupidity tax so that I can buy cheap drinks! I always raise my glass in thanks.

    • AFR says:

      12:33pm | 22/10/09

      SM, the stats are agains you, sorry. only around 10% of gamblers are considered to be potentially “problem gamblers” (with an additional 15% experienceing “moderate risks”).

      Granted, most problem gamblers are pokie players, and yes, the authorites catoegorise lotteries and keno to be “safer” forms of gambling. But that doesn’t mean most pokie players have a problem.

      I actually support many of the proposals (with the execptioon of the reduced ATM limits), but only where is can clearly be established there is net community benefit. For example, the recent banning of ATMs in Victorian venues will be interesting to watch, as is the recent reductions in the aomunt of cash payouts allowed in Queensland.

      I also think the author of the article is quite cynical of gevernment responses. Of course we are all cynical of governments when there is taxation revenuie invovled, but in this circumstances, its a little unfounded.

    • Daniel says:

      12:47pm | 22/10/09

      Pokies are nothing but a state Government revenue raiser that should have been banned in all clubs and Casinos years ago.

    • DG says:

      01:06pm | 22/10/09

      SM (08:58am | 22/10/09)

      My wife loves the pokies. She gets all excited by the flashing lights, the chance of winning etc. But the reality is that she has probably put less than $50 through the pokies in the 7 years we have been together.

      So yes, some people do ENJOY the pokies, responsibly and without any hint of ‘problem gambling’. However, I must admit that it’s slightly disconcerting that she’s giggling and bouncing off the walls for a few flashing lights and infuriating music - I’m thinking I should get some lights and music installed in the spare room so that I can distract her from the fact I haven’t mowed the laws and then watch the footy without interruption.

    • SM says:

      01:13pm | 22/10/09

      I suppose AFR that it depends on what the definition of a “problem” gambler is.  From my experience, the proportion of poker machine players whose gambling has a significantly adverse effect on their lifestyles is much, much more than 10% or 15%

    • SM says:

      01:17pm | 22/10/09

      DG, your wife is part of a miniscule subset of all pokie players. Congratulations to you (and to her).  But if she’s only put though $50 in 7 years, she certainly doesn’t “love” them.

    • AJ says:

      02:44pm | 22/10/09

      SM, you’re pulling statistics out of your earhole, if you’d please stop, that’d be appreciated.  And the amount of elitist judgement of pokie users is staggering.

      This argument should be what measures should be put in place to enable continued usage by people who use poker machines responsibly whilst allowing the identification and treatment of actual problem gamblers.  I think there are some useful ideas, but the problem is with implementation.  Which means the problem lies with the influence of the pub lobby in the states and the massive labor party pokie revenue here in the ACT.

    • SM says:

      03:02pm | 22/10/09

      AJ, not sure what you’re reading, but the only “stat” I cited was this:

      “From my experience, the proportion of poker machine players whose gambling has a significantly adverse effect on their lifestyles is much, much more than 10% or 15%”

      Note the opening 3 words of my “stat” AJ

    • Insider says:

      09:55pm | 22/10/09

      Interesting that there seems to be no mention in the productivity Report referring to the link between smoking and poker machine performance. The only restirction in the last 10 years that has had a significant effect on gaming revenue has been the implementation of smoking bans. Yet the NSW government has not only provided an escape clause in the form of “outdoor gaming areas” but has allowed the industry to create rooms that do not comply even remotely with the legislation due to the lack of enforcement.
      The productivity Commission should recommend a ban on smoking before any costly technical recommendations. Cost nothing but would be a major impact!

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter