Prev
Next

Kill the pokies and risk killing tourism too

Bob Baldwin

by Bob Baldwin

06 Oct 05:35am

Must Reads

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project - this is a caption

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project

41

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics - this is a caption

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics

60

Please enter your password - this is a caption

Please enter your password

39

Filed under: Crown Casino, Gambling, Government, Poker Machines, Tourism

114 comments

As Australian Parliamentarians consider their voting positions on poker machine mandatory pre-commitment technologies, the impact on gambling on society, and a sensible and evidence based approach to fix the downsides to gambling, it’s important to consider what regulating this leisure activity will mean to inbound tourism over the next decade and beyond.

Gotta love those bright lights. Picture: Herald Sun 

To maintain international competitiveness, many Australian casinos have been actively investing in new tourism infrastructure and upgrading existing properties. The total capital expenditure program across Australian casinos exceeds AU$4.4 billion with impressive upgrades to Crown Melbourne and Burswood in Perth, The Star in Sydney, and SKYCITY in Darwin amongst others.

Over the same time, there has been increasing competition from Asia, most notably in the emergence of ‘integrated resorts’ that offer unprecedented opportunities to grow international tourism.  Singapore has overseen the construction of two integrated casino resorts at a combined cost of around AU$12 billion. 

Resorts World Sentosa, a 49‐hectare development located on Singapore’s holiday island of Sentosa, is Singapore’s largest integrated resort. The complex cost approximately AU$6.9bn to develop and opened in January 2010.  Singapore’s other gaming focused development is Marina Bay Sands, located immediately adjacent to the Singapore CBD. 

The two properties have generated significant economic benefits for Singapore, helping to grow Singapore’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by 14.5% in 2011. 

Contributions from the two integrated resorts in the first nine months was almost half of tourism GDP in the same period. GDP from Services Producing Industries grew 10.5% in 2010. Tourism‐related services sectors were bolstered by strong visitor arrivals as well as the opening of the integrated resorts.

Tourism revenue soared 49 percent to SG$18.8 billion dollars in 2010. Hotel Room Revenue was estimated at SG$1.9 billion in 2010, increasing 21.8 percent year‐on‐year.

Chairman of the leading political party in Singapore, Lim Boon Heng, acknowledges that the two integrated resorts have benefited the Singapore economy. Considered ‘Singapore’s Nick Xenophon’ Lim’s opposition to gambling as an industry during the casino debate in 2005 caused him to go through a “very difficult process” to accept the decision for the sake of jobs that the integrated resorts would create.

One year on, the integrated resorts have created thousands of direct jobs in operation but also spin‐offs for the tourism sector, particularly travel, food and beverage industries, boosting the Singapore economy.

The Singaporean Government has provided incentives to organisers of business events, meetings, conferences and exhibitions to hold events in Singapore, and even facilitates the ‘fast tracking’ through airport, customs and immigration of VIP visitors to the integrated resorts.

This stands in stark contrast to the Australian Government, where AU$34million was cut from the Customs and Border Protection budget in May this year. In Singapore, fast tracking of customs and immigration means passengers are met at the airbridge and are taken through a personalised immigration and customs process. In Australia, budget cuts equate to longer queues at our major airport arrivals halls.

The emergence of integrated resorts presents a huge challenge to the ‘business as usual’ model for Australian tourism.

And it’s not just Singapore leaving Australia behind in this regard.  Currently, the existing integrated resorts in Asia are located in Macau and Malaysia as well.There is an emergence of new integrated resorts across the region, with planned developments in the Philippines, Taiwan, Vietnam and Japan.

Since the last federal election, Australia has dropped in travel and tourism competitiveness world rankings from 4th in 2008 to 13th in 2011, while Singapore has moved up from 16th to 10th over the same period.

China’s outbound travel market is one of the fastest growing in the world. Chinese visitors represent more than AU$3.2 billion to the Australian tourism industry and by 2020, that market will be worth AU$7‐9 billion, 60 percent more than the entire value of the tourism industry today.

In this context, Australian integrated resorts present an excellent tourism opportunity for the Chinese market. However, factors such as longer travel distances, language barriers, and the relative ease of obtaining visas may hinder Australia’s ability to effectively compete in this market.

Clearly, the proximity of Singapore to mainland China and having a shared language means it will always outperform Australia in capturing this segment of the Chinese tourism market. However, the size of the potential market means there remains huge potential for Australia to capture a decent portion of the expected growth.

That is, so long as we start to offer visas for longer time periods, provide simpler online visa processes for visitors from Asian countries (in languages other than English), and don’t regulate ourselves out of the market.

Independent MP Andrew Wilkie has signalled he expects the Gillard Government to introduce mandatory pre-commitment laws by May 2012. With initial drafting still in early consideration stage, the public debate has a long way to run before mandatory pre-commitment legislation is brought to the Parliament. However, when it does vote, our Parliament must ensure Australia doesn’t regulate itself out of billions of dollars in revenue.

Most commented

431Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself
390There's no one Thomson won't burn to save his skin
336Animal experiments won't cure me from cancer
313Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking
266Who murdered the Arts degree?
246A big day for Thomson, who thus far is guilty of nothing...
231South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.
231Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia...

114 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Save me says:

      05:37am | 06/10/11

      Seriously, Punch? Did you make them pay to place this ad?

      Go poke yourself Bob (heh.. see what I did there? I used ‘poke’ instead of ..). Nobody is buying your industry’s tired rehashed bullshit.

      Tourism will not die. This entire article is a lie. Oops I made a rhyme. Stop - hammer time.

      Reply

    • acotrel says:

      06:29am | 06/10/11

      It was a much better deal when the pokies weren’t widespread throughout Victoria. We then had to travel to the clubs along the Murray to play them - AS TOURISTS !
      The pokies certainly don’t bring tourists to our town, they’ve lost their gambling money long before they ever get here ! And if they do play them here, they’ll get dudded ! People are not stupid, - they only have to play the machines once in any country town away from the main tourists areas to find out th t the venue operators are on the make, big time !

    • I'm not Erick, but I miss him says:

      08:02am | 06/10/11

      What a joke.

      Once again we’ve got some bought-and-paid-for by the clubs industry politician making wild, unsourced, inaccurate claims.

      A quick look at any casino annual report will show you that the main overseas revenue stream is high rollers - the so-called whales - who wouldn’t look twice at a poker machine. They come to play the table games, where at least there is the illusion of skill.

      We shouldn’t be surprised. Yesterday we had a similar piece of lies - yes, let’s call them what they are, lies - from Baldwin’s Liberal mate Stuart Ciobo, who both deliberately inflated the cost of pre-commitment technology, and ignored the fact that in the case he cited, almost none of the machines will need it anyway (only the expensive ones will).

      Two good things come from this piece of tripe:

      1. It demonstrates that the Liberals are either taking money from the pokies industry to spruik their false claims, or, so bereft of any morality that they will argue the case of an industry which destroys families just for the sake of opposing Labor.

      2. The comments on what is usually a rabid right-wing website are overwhelmingly against the Libs. Looks like you’ve backed the wrong horse here Bob.

    • Tony of Poorakistan says:

      08:40am | 06/10/11

      This article is a shocker. Surely no-one actually thinks this way. 
       
      Bought and sold by the poker machine lobby. 
       
      I’m normally a Liberal voter, but I’d vote informal before you got my vote, Bob.

    • GC Dude says:

      11:40am | 06/10/11

      Newsflash mate…..Tourism is already dead. Lara Binge made sure of that.

    • Leto says:

      12:41pm | 06/10/11

      What kind of degenerate looser goes to another country to play their pokies anyway? Maybe there are pokier soundtracks released here that don’t come out anywhere else. A beep followed by two beeps instead of the usual three?

      You would have had more success drawing some non existent connection between paedophiles and pokies; at least you could have then talked about ‘protecting the children’.

    • John says:

      12:13pm | 05/04/12

      Bob’s article makes sense from an Asian Tourism prospective (Singapore in particular) but from an Australian tourism brand, it has less validity.
      The Casino business and particualrly the integrated model attracts revnue streams from not just gaming but their entire business model. Las Vegas Casinos currently make 58% of revenue through non gaming avenues, 10 years ago it was only 37%.
      Where the Singapore model is brilliant is they charge all local Singaporians $100 just to enter their casinos. The only valid Poker machine model that is even remotely workable is WA. Burswood Casino in Perth (Crown Casino) is the only place in the whole state with Pokies. If you want to play you have to travel to the casino - staff there can evict problem gamblers with little fear they will head down the road to another pub to continue punting. Bob Carr has alot to answer for in NSW, it was his decision to get pokies in pubs and now NSW has more pokies per capita than any where in the world - what a disgrace.

    • Patrick Elliott says:

      05:42am | 06/10/11

      Yeah, because the only thing worth doing for tourists when visiting Australia is to blow your money on the pokies.

      If Australia regulates itself out of billions of dollars of revenue then so be it, a business model that relies on human misery is immoral. We do not hesitate to condemn slavery, even though it’s abolition had grave economic impact upon those economies that relied upon it.

      Bob Baldwin has also not considered where the money that people do not financially ruin themselves with on pokies will go to. Presumably to more useful sectors of the economy than on lining the casino’s pockets.

      Reply

    • Nathan says:

      05:56am | 06/10/11

      Well said, i enjoyed the point about putting well being above potential economic gain

    • Dean says:

      07:50am | 06/10/11

      I have to agree as well Patrick, I grew up as a child of a problem gambler, we would have the arse out of our pants and not two pennies to rub together but come pay day dad would be down the club playing the pokies because ” that was the only way we were going to get ahead.”
      On another related point the latest Getup add is closer to the truth than anything else from the pro pokies lobby

      https://www.getup.org.au/campaigns/pokies-reform/grandfinal-ad/our-ad-on-the-air

    • acotrel says:

      09:49am | 06/10/11

      ’ We do not hesitate to condemn slavery, even though it’s abolition had grave economic impact upon those economies that relied upon it. ‘

      The fathers of conservatism in Australia, the John MacArthurs, wanted a country with holdings owned by a kangaroo aristocracy , and run by convict laborers.  So speak for yourself, some of us have a different utopia !

    • Cam says:

      04:02pm | 06/10/11

      Well Las Vegas seems to be doing good trade on this basis ....

    • hot tub political machine says:

      04:26pm | 06/10/11

      Cam…..http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/03/us/03vegas.html?pagewanted=all

    • Nathan says:

      05:54am | 06/10/11

      There are so many variables that affect tourism far beyond pokies. The biggest issue is the value of the $A. I really doubt that tourists come to Australian Casino’s for the pokies either.

      Reply

    • Donna says:

      10:34am | 06/10/11

      I agree. Besides, pokies are everywhere, they aren’t the exlusive attraction of casinos. I also think Bob may have missed Recommendation 43 of the Parliamentary Joint Select Committee on Gambling Reform’s report:

      “9.106       The committee recommends that, upon proof of identity, foreign tourists in casinos be issued with a card that overrides the mandatory pre-commitment scheme for a period of 24 hours. This should be monitored by the national regulatory authority for abuse. “

      Finally, it also leaves out that pre-commitment is only on high-intensity machines, which only 12% of players use.

    • Mahhrat says:

      05:59am | 06/10/11

      How many free lunches did this one cost you, Bob?

      The problem with your argument’s veracity is simple:  if tourism was really what was going to suffer, we wouldn’t have such a massive problem gambling issue in the first place.

      Gambling is, like all vices, an often enjoyable but very easily abused entertainment medium that causes a great deal of pain in the community.

      If you want to enjoy the profits of all that misery, you should also pay the entire cost to the industry of your actions.  You lot want us to be responsible for our actions - if we gamble and lose, it’s our problem - but you don’t want to be responsible for the fact that you’re providing the addiction.

      Individual responsibility works both ways.

      Reply

    • TChong says:

      06:06am | 06/10/11

      Bob Baldwin, obviosly a champion of Hockeynomics is now out selling a gambling led economic recovery plan.
      Is there no level the Libs will sink too in order to protect the multi million dollar profits of gambling and casino operaters ?
      Hi Flying Big Nobs who have fortunes of company profits to gamble have to cue up like everyone else at customs ?
      OUTRAGEOUS !
      These people have money to burn, so no amount of fawning and toadying will suffice.
      Crawling after, and bending over for gamblers ( the more money, the harder the Coation wil reach for their toes) is how the Libs would like to see this country sold to overseas money.
      Be solicistist as you like Bob, but these aint the type who would respect you, or Australia, in the morning.

      Reply

    • Sue says:

      02:40pm | 06/10/11

      I’m feeling embarrassed that Baldwin is my Federal Member.  Why would we want to encourage tourists to spend all their time in Casinos.  Don’t they have families who would rather spend the money seeing Australia .
      It seems Bob Baldwin is heavily influenced by Big Pokies.
      Most of us do not want to be seen as the Pokie Capital of the world.  Give over, Bob, your voodoo tourism scare is ridiculous

    • David says:

      06:06am | 06/10/11

      Seriously, what gibberish!?

      I’m trying very hard to work out what is the link between the title to this article, the very tenuous conclusion, and the bulk of the text in the middle.

      Bob, are you trying to argue that unless foreigners know they can come to Australia to spew limitless amounts of cash into poker machines, then they won’t be attracted here?

      Crikey, I didn’t know poker machines were such an integral part of Australia’s tourist industrty!

      Forget, “Throw another shrimp on the barbie” and “Where the bloody hell are you?”  The next big tourist campaign will be “Throw another sawbuck in the pokie!”

      Tripe.  Rubbish.  Nonsense.  Hypocritical.

      Reply

    • Kipling says:

      06:53am | 06/10/11

      People actually voted for you? Phew lucky escape me thinks that you are “shadow” minister….

      I guess at least it can be said no one saw the “tourism will suffer” angle coming the article has that in its favour.

      It is entirely curious that one does not need to look too far to find comment about the current Federal Government not listening to voters but here is a brilliant example of Opposition, nay not just opposition, but Clubs Australia (do they sponsor you also as well as all the junior sports?) not listening.

      Just look at comments so far and take the fairly blatant hint. I think the comment above that concludes with Trip. Rubbish. Nonsense, Hypocritical. Pretty much captures your waffle and the entire defend not addressing problem gambling debate.

      Clearly we have one side not listening and the other refusing to hear.

      Reply

    • BMJ says:

      06:54am | 06/10/11

      When I’m trying to convince friends from overseas to come to Australia for holiday I’ll be sure to mention pokies.

      What a load of tripe. Go to the nearest mirror and slap yourself for thinking anyone is going to buy that.

      Reply

    • hendrikus van hasselt says:

      07:01am | 06/10/11

      perhaps it will slow the bogan tourist trade but that would only be intra state.
      There is simply no data to suggest that tourists coming to australia come for the purpose of gambling.
      Our casinos are far too second rate for that exercise.

      Reply

    • acotrel says:

      07:07am | 06/10/11

      The best tourist town in NE Victoria, Mansfield -  has no pokies.  There are two pubs in the centre of town which serve excellent meals, and are a delight to visit - all done without pokies revenue.
      I don’t know of even one pokies venue anywhere which serves decent meals, most don’t even hand out a free coffee, let alone free alcohol like they do in the US !  They don’t know the meaning of the word ‘service’.  Their meals areas are often like the ‘greasy spoon’ in most factories !

      Reply

    • October Folly says:

      07:14am | 06/10/11

      I didn’t know this was April Fools day.

      Reply

    • d says:

      07:17am | 06/10/11

      I dontunderstand this at all?

      Casinos will not be effected by the limits on pokies.

      You will still be allowed to spend your 1.21 jigawats of money a minute on pokies in casinos.

      Are the clubs this desperate?

      Next the will join the tobacco companies and start sueing

      Reply

    • Kipling says:

      07:23am | 06/10/11

      I just realised it is this kind of rubbish that actually makes voting for independents the thinking person’s choice…

      Reply

    • iansand says:

      07:29am | 06/10/11

      I doubt that there is a single person who is thinking of coming to Australia who decides not to because they can’t play the pokies at the Shaggers Ridge rissole.  This article has taken the debate even deeper into farce.

      Reply

    • acotrel says:

      07:31am | 06/10/11

      There are pokies as well as drug dealers in our town.  Both are protected by the law, and both are a major drain on the local economy.

      Reply

    • Gratuitous Adviser says:

      07:31am | 06/10/11

      To add to those before me:  I cannot believe that the Liberal Party opposition can believe and support the sewerage (pathetic “long bow” argument) in this article.  It has to be an ingenious ploy by the Liberal Party “back room” to seek out those stupid and naive in our community (poker machine players) to cynically gain their vote.  It has to be.  Surely there are some parliamentarians in the Liberal Party with morals on this issue.

      Reply

    • Leanne says:

      07:32am | 06/10/11

      FInding it very hard to get a link between poker machine reform and Asian tourism. Perhaps we should read into this that Bob Baldwin is worried that some of the pensioners in Forster (mid north coast NSW)  who have been feeding their retirement savings and pensions into the Clubs up there will run out of money and what Forster really needs is a big Casino on the beach to cater for hundreds of thousands of Asian tourists?

      Jimmys Beach might be a good place Bob? Running this article in the Great Lakes Advocate are we Bob?

      I agree with David ..... “Tripe. Rubbish. Nonsense, Hypocritical.” but then, that’s just Bob!

      Reply

    • Abe says:

      07:35am | 06/10/11

      Wow Bob, just wow.

      Reply

    • Luke says:

      07:47am | 06/10/11

      The fact is, whether for this policy or not, the pokies are taxed at an incredible rate, and the reduction in tax money from them will result in that money not going somewhere else.  These machines, (as I’m sure everyone understands) do bring a lot of revenue into the pubs, clubs, etc.  If the pokie revenue goes down, the prices of everything else in the pub will go up.  I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m sick to death of the price of a simple pint going up and up and up with this government.  And for those of you campaigning against this as its ‘a vice/ bad’ for the community, people addicted to gambling are always going to find something to blow their money on.  If it’s not the pokies, it’ll be the dogs, the horses, the whatever.  I say let the revenue come, to keep the price of beer down. Simple.

      Reply

    • Smith says:

      08:55am | 06/10/11

      Raising prices doesn’t necessarily raise money if my local raised the prices too much I would find a new local.

      If anything it might actually raise the competition and make pubs and clubs have to actually give a shit about their customers with good service, entertainment etc instead of just rolling in easy money.

    • acotrel says:

      09:30am | 06/10/11

      Nothing better than going to a pokies venue, and getting a cheap beer while losing $40 on the machines ?  The joke is that the beer is not even cheaper in the pokies venues in our town, and the meals are exactly what you get in the local fish and chips shop for less.

    • Frank says:

      07:49am | 06/10/11

      listen if the Liberal Party want to back the side of the rich Clubs Australia line fine, but don’t make this out to be what it isn’t..it is not a tax, like the cigarette excise it is a economic measure to stem a dangerous practice, Problem gambling is serious and it is debilatating, this is not a lie from Julia or a Green’s push this is from an INDEPENDANT note independant member of the House of Reps, at least the Govt. and Wilkie wants to do something for Problem Gamblers not just make them more comfortable and get them another drink while they spill their money into the pockets of Clubs Australia, whose argument, like the Tabbaco industry is “hey they are adults, it’s not illegal, why shouldn’t we exploit vunerable people for profit, it’s fun”

      Reply

    • Nathan Explosion says:

      07:56am | 06/10/11

      You can still keep your casinos.

      But the people who live in Australia don’t want pokies in every single club and pub you come across. Seriously, it’s damn hard to find a pub or club nowadays that DOESN’T have pokies in them.

      Reply

    • Brian says:

      09:48am | 06/10/11

      Come to WA - only the casino is allowed them: far, far more enjoyable, to my mind, and the pubs still stay alive. The real joke is that come GST carveup time we’re assumed to get just as much gambling revenue per head as the eastern states, even without them!

      Of course, we still have drunken yobbos, but you can’t have everything.

    • ShamWow says:

      07:57am | 06/10/11

      What about a compromise? Casinos can continue as per normal which should allow them to invest these said billions and we can start pulling the pokies out of clubs and pubs.

      Reply

    • acotrel says:

      09:35am | 06/10/11

      @ShamWow
      You get the prize for the best suggestion of the decade ! We’d be mush better off sitting in the clubs and pubs playing cards, drinking and talking, sometimes having a dance with the chicky babes, and giving money to a worthy charity !

    • Kika says:

      01:08pm | 06/10/11

      Yeah… and whatever happened to the meat tray raffles etc to raise money for the kids footy teams??

    • Jane says:

      07:58am | 06/10/11

      We cannot compete with Asia for this type of tourism. They even attract our domestic tourists away from domestic destinations. In fact as long as we are a stronge economy we will not be able to compete for mass tourism. Who wants to work for Asian wages while having to pay Australian expenses? Our resorts are getting old with little chance of capital gains in the future no point investing in them.

      We need niche adventure tourism industry and accept mass tourism is over. Not worth destroying more Australian family lives just in some false hope a casino will save our tourism indusry. Has not so far so if it does nto work now, will not work later either.

      Reply

    • Steve says:

      07:59am | 06/10/11

      This is the quality of politician we have today. This is the biggest load of BS I’ve ever read. Half the office (full of white collar Liberal voting workers) cannot believe what a load of crap this is.

      Australia has many things to offer overseas tourists, playing “Where’s the Gold” at Revesby Workers is not one.

      Reply

    • acotrel says:

      08:22am | 06/10/11

      @Steve
      ‘This is the quality of politician we have today.’

      I agree with you - what a disgraceful uncaring, and cynical attitude.  I wonder who votes for people like this ?  They must be either blind or retarded ?

    • adam says:

      08:58am | 06/10/11

      @Steve and acotrel,

      This is the kind of politician we the electorate accept these days. If we, on both sides demanded more of our “leaders” we may just get it. Each election however we accept the dross thrown up at us. Bob is as poor as any in the houses of Parliment but we keep putting ‘em in there

    • acotrel says:

      09:39am | 06/10/11

      @adam
      We could get better politicians if we paid them more. However they’d probably just play the extra money into the pokies !

    • adam says:

      12:12pm | 06/10/11

      Acotrel no we wouldn’t, we’d like as not just have fatter pigs feeding at a deeper trough

    • Paul J says:

      08:11am | 06/10/11

      What total rubbish and given the parlous situation in our pubs and clubs where they are nothing more than facilities designed to empty people of their hard earned the author should be ashamed of himself.

      Live music in this country is dying the death of a thousand cuts as more venues make way for the pokies so how about they offer proper entertainment instead. There is a reason pokies are banned in many parts of the world including most of the USA and even in WA except for the casino. 

      And personally we don’t care about the big punters having to wait a few minutes to check in through customs like every one else.

      Reply

    • Anna C says:

      08:15am | 06/10/11

      While I don’t support Andrew Wilke’s mandatory pre-commitment policy on Pokies, I think Bob is drawing too long a bow by saying that it will have a negative effect on tourism. Gambling has never been on the top of my to-do list whenever I have travelled overseas. But then maybe that’s just me.

      Reply

    • Kika says:

      01:01pm | 06/10/11

      You aren’t alone! I’d rather spend my money on other things than wasting it gambling.

    • AdamC says:

      08:30am | 06/10/11

      I am not sure how this issue fits within the broader pokies debate. (Surely even Xenophon isn’t stupid enough to propose pre-committments in dedicated casinos.) However, you are spot on in terms of the tourism potential of integrated casino resorts in Australia.

      Having been to both Resorts World Sentosa and Marina Bay Sands, I can highly recommend them for any foodie, shopping afficianado or occasional gambler. As usual, Australia increasingly lags behind its neighbour to the north, in this case by not offering the same standard of diversified leisure destinations. While Melbourne’s Crown casino is endeavouring to hit the same heights, it seems to be slow going, quite possibly because, unlike its Singapore rival developments, Crown does not enjoy the support or assistance of the government.

      I suspect this has something to do with our growing puritanism when it comes to gambling. Some of the bizarre responses to this article, from otherwise level-headed Punchers, attest to that. Yet, at the same time, people fret about the state of Australia’s tourism industry. Go figure.

      Reply

    • marley says:

      09:20am | 06/10/11

      Well, if we’re talking international tourism as opposed to domestic tourism, I doubt the majority of tourists come here to go to casinos, so I’m not convinced that there’s as much potential as you envisage.  No one is going to fly over from the US or the UK just to go play a pokie or go shopping here.  Especially not shopping.

      And why would Chinese or Japanese or Korean gamblers descend here in hordes when Singapore is closer, has better shopping, and better Asian food?  Of course, Singapore has very little to offer the tourist other than gambling, shopping and food so naturally its tourist industry has to focus on these three.  I think we should be focusing on the things that are unique to Australia, things that will make a potential visitor believe its worth blowing a few thousand bucks on air fare, hotels, and car rental or tours - and casinos wouldn’t be high on that list of attractions in my mind.

    • CD says:

      09:28am | 06/10/11

      Hey AdamC Xenophon is stupid enough to include casinos in his pre-commitment proposal. And it is his proposal - his mouthpiece is Wilkie.

    • AdamC says:

      09:56am | 06/10/11

      @Marley, you could have said the same thing about Singapore ten years and look what happened. It turned itself from a three-hour stopover with some ‘dufry’ shopping into a destination in and of itself. And it has none of our advantages in terms of beaches, culture and natural heritage. (Though the food is pretty top notch, especially the hawker-style stuff. Not as good as Malaysian though, at least according to my boyfriend’s family!)

      Not every tourist, especially family and Asian travellers, want to do ‘travel’. That is, many are less inclined to march to Macchu Picchu than they are to recline by the pool with a book and a cocktail. Or maybe they’ll take a relaxed day trip to a winery, visit a rainforest, or a reef, or even a decent beach. You can’t do any of those things in Singapore. And, if they want to have a flutter at the Black Jack table, or lose some money on the Roulette wheel, what on earth is wrong with that?

      Australia is excellent at not adding value to its inherent tourism assets. Based on my fellow Punchers here, that doesn’t look likely to change.

      @CD, I see Xenophon as being the real mover. Not in any sort of conspiratorial sense - Wilkie is certainly sincere in his convictions. But Xenophon has been around for longer, though, and is a far more effective advocate.

    • marley says:

      10:48am | 06/10/11

      @AdamC - not so sure about that. I first visited Singapore in about 1988 - and it was a shopping and food paradise then.  It’s simply built on what had been there for years. 

      It’s also a very convenient convention center - that’s what I was there for in ‘88- you can bring people from all over Asia there quite quickly and easily.  Businessmen aren’t there to sit on beaches, but a little flutter in the casinos after the meetings works well for them.  Australia simply doesn’t have the location to be as attractive for that purpose.

      As for Asians, I know their idea of tourism differs from the European or American concept - my point was, they’re going to come here for beaches and tours, not for casinos, food and shopping.  I’m not saying they shouldn’t have the chance to have the odd flutter.  I am saying that putting the focus on the latter rather than the former in a tourism strategy would be a mistake. 

      PS love Malaysian food - Singapore is good because you can get great Malay, Thai and Indian food as well as various versions of Chinese cuisine.

    • Ando says:

      02:51pm | 06/10/11

      Marley,
      “I doubt the majority of tourists come here to go to casinos” . Obviously, but not many people travel for a specific activity. However a casino is certainly part of tourism mix. Pokies however are a waste of space.

    • marley says:

      03:13pm | 06/10/11

      @Ando - oh, I’m not saying that it’s not part of the mix - sure it is. But anyone who says that putting in the pokies rule is going to kill the casinos, much less tourism, is engaging in extreme hyperbole (or, in a bow to our illustrious leader, hyperbowl).

    • subotic says:

      08:30am | 06/10/11

      I think we’ve all once again missed the elephant in the room: Freedom of Choice.

      This isn’t about tourism. It’s not even about money per se.

      It’s about an individual’s right to chose to play the slots or not. And to not have the government tell us how much we can spend and when.

      They came and took away our guns and no one complained.
      They came and took away our access to affordable alcohol and cigarettes and no one complained.

      Now they’re coming to tell me how much money I can spend and when.

      When does this garbage stop? Hey government, I already HAVE A MOTHER, and I sure as hell don’t need another.

      As save me said (comment 1) STOP, Hammer time… already.

      Reply

    • Nic says:

      09:15am | 06/10/11

      Surely it’s also your choice to do whatever hard drugs you want
      And it’s also your choice to drive at whatever speed you want
      And it must be your choice to have sex with whoever you want anytime you want

      How dare they take away your freedoms like this right!?

      OH WAIT! We don’t live in a world of pure libertine hedonism, the Government has a moral obligation to curb and legislate against activities that’re harmful to the individual and to the people around him.

      Problem gambling is like that. You personally will likely not even notice the change, you have to be tossing an incredible amount of money down the pokies to even be affected by this, this doesn’t hit the guy putting $20 in every week or so.

      Not to mention this article is ridiculous:

      -Casinos aren’t affected.
      -Even if they were their money comes from the Tables.
      -No-one comes to Australia to play Pokies.
      -The tourism industry will literally not even notice.

    • acotrel says:

      09:44am | 06/10/11

      @subotic
      ‘freedom of choice’ - We should take our gun laws away so people can more easily shoot themselves and others ?

    • Mahhrat says:

      10:41am | 06/10/11

      @subotic:  Freedom of Choice, as you call it, only functions when your choices do not impact on another’s.

      If I go and spend all my money at the pokies tonight, my family doesn’t eat for a week.  They are deprived of their choice not only to choose what food they’d like, but a choice of any food at all!

      Who do they seek recompense from?  Me?  I’ve got no money.  I can’t provide them food.  We use government for that sort of thing - not just to provide food, but also to help me realise I have a gambling problem and to do something about it.

      These are worthy goals, but it’s obviously got to the stage where that is getting prohibitively expensive to maintain.  Therefore, we regulate, and attempt to stop it become a problem in the first place.  Prevention is usually cheaper than treatment, after all.

      Instead of paying a higher tax rate, we regulate how money is transferred in the first place.

      You just want to pull up the ladder because you’re okay.  Millions aren’t.  Stop being such a hard ass.

    • subotic says:

      10:53am | 06/10/11

      @Nic, no, I don’t advocate anarchy or even a hedonistic ‘no rules’ lifestyle. What I do disagree with is the government “carding” us with a licence to punt. Regardless of an individual having a ‘problem’ with gambling or not, it’s about a person’s right to privacy. Which, unlike using hard drugs, breaking speeding laws and irresponsible, carefree approaches to intimate activity, shouldn’t be monitored and patrolled by the government. What I do with my money is my business.

      @acotrel, 1st thing Hitler did when he got into power was to disarm the population so they couldn’t fight back. Bet your parents/ granparents wish the German population could have fought back…

      As a society we are no longer allowed to protect ourselves or our families, and criminals have more rights inside your household than you do. I have yet to see any peer reviewed studies that prove a society with access to weapons is any more dangerous than a society without weapons.

    • subotic says:

      10:59am | 06/10/11

      @Mahhrat, if YOU have a gambling problem, why should OTHERS be punished? Why does everyone have to give up THEIR right to freedom and privacy because YOU have a problem?

      I’m sick and tired of shouldering the politically correct crap for the rest of society who can’t for once in their pitiable lives take responsibility for themselves.

      Here’s a suggestion - Grow up. I did. I’m a big boy now and can take care of myself and my family. And I shouldn’t have to give up my privacy to continue to do so…

    • Steve says:

      11:20am | 06/10/11

      oh boo-hoo subotic. “I’m a lone ranger in a world where society is out to get me. i have no choice or freedoms. i provide for my family and the rest of society are bludgers”.

      Seriously harden the fark up. If you want to throw hundreds of dollars down the pokies you still can mate, you will need a card, just like to need a licence to drive. If you want to throw a few dollars down, you won’t need a licence, just like you don’t need a licence to ride you’re bike in the park.

      I know, how about you cry about your freedoms being limited all while failing to recognise you live in one of the most free countries with the highest quality of life in the world.

    • subotic says:

      11:45am | 06/10/11

      @Steve, I fully “recognise you live in one of the most free countries with the highest quality of life in the world”, and I’d really like to keep a hold of them freedoms before any more of them are taken away. Where does it end mate?

      As Gil Scott-Heron’s grandmother once said, if you don’t stand for something, you’ll go for anything.

      Gotta start saying NO somewhere along the line Steve, right? Or do we just give everything up each time some new PC whinger comes along?

      Enough is enough…

    • Mahhrat says:

      12:36pm | 06/10/11

      @Sub, alright, so my kids don’t eat for a week.  That’s not their choice, oh warrior-for-freedom, so what are they supposed to do?

      Try to lay off the capslock too mate, you’ll get a hernia.

    • subotic says:

      01:14pm | 06/10/11

      @Mahhrat, so YOU get your family into trouble and somehow that’s MY problem? I didn’t force you to put your family into any particular position, but somehow I should be punished for it?

      By that standard then, every single time through my own stupid actions I come up short somehow, I should expect you and your family to have to cough up to bail me out?

      As Steve demanded of me in an earlier comment, HARDEN UP. You got yourself into it, you get yourself out. Society, the government and me owe you nothing.

      And just for the record, I don’t gamble. Never have. Doesn’t interest me. I work too hard to throw my money away into slots or Lotto.

      But I will fight for my right to keep my privacy and my freedom of choice.

      CAPS ON.

    • marley says:

      08:30am | 06/10/11

      Oh well, I have to go along with the consensus - this is nonsense.

      First, perhaps we might want to take a look at the comparative penetration of casinos and pokies into the countries that rank above us on the tourism competitiveness scale.  Any facts there, Bob? Are Austria and Canada and France awash with poker machines?  Or does their tourism perhaps rely on other factors?

      Sure, we’re close to Asia, and having casinos will attract the big rollers from China and similar countries on occasion.  But don’t rather a large number of Chinese tourists come on organized package tours to see koalas and duty free stores, not casinos? 

      As for easing visa requirements for Chinese visitors - perhaps you might want to talk to your colleague the shadow minister for migration about which nation provides the highest number of visa overstayers, one of the highest proportions of overstayers to visas issued, and the highest absolute number of asylum seekers before suggesting we relax visa requirements.

      Reply

    • Gus says:

      08:37am | 06/10/11

      If he had bothered to do any research before agreeing to be another mouth piece for the clubs he would know that Singapore already uses pre-commitment for the locals, you also have to pay a $100 entrance fee before you can star playing.

      The pokie’s in Singapore a more highly regulated than the proposed regulation here.

      Bob will make a good lap dog when he is Minister.

      Reply

    • rach says:

      01:38pm | 06/10/11

      Absolutely, I’m glad someone picked up on this. Has Bob even been to Singapore?!

      You can’t even compare Sentosa or Marina Bay to anything we have in Australia. Yes, Sentosa has a casino, but it also has Universal Studios, a beach, a luge track, an indoor sky-diving centre etc etc. I would suspect only a small fraction of visitors to the island actually enter the casino. It is more a family adventure-land, which is why it makes so much money.

      As Gus says, in Singapore, locals will have to pay $100 upfront to even enter a casino. I’d love to see that in Australia!

    • mick says:

      09:37am | 06/10/11

      What a lot of crock.  Bob Baldwin is clearly a representative of the ‘poor’ Pubs and Clubs which are going broke but keep running expensive prime time TV campaigns to convince voters that the end is nigh.

      I’ve got some sobering news for this damaging industry, develop some empathy with the people whose lives and families you devastate.  Pre commitment will unlikely make a huge difference to this industry.  As for tourism, this tax will have no effect whatsoever.

      I agree with a comment (above) which described Bob Baldwin as a clubs and pubs ‘stooge’, another reason to believe that the Opposition is owned by business and will be its spokesperson irrespective of the damage to society.

      Reply

    • Peter says:

      09:43am | 06/10/11

      Sorry, but are you saying that the proposed pre-commitment technology will actually apply to non-Australians (ie. international tourists) on holiday here?  I’ve not heard that before.

      Reply

    • Zaf says:

      09:48am | 06/10/11

      Hey legalising heroin would probably be good for tourism.  Let’s do that!!!  Because, why not?

      Reply

    • dancan says:

      09:49am | 06/10/11

      This would be the first article that I’ve seen on The Punch where all comments so far have been unanimous.  Bob, I’ll give you 1 point for this piece of crap, because you’ve brought The Punch together.

      Reply

    • Jason Smith says:

      09:50am | 06/10/11

      wow this is a first? Everyone agreeing on the Punch!!

      Reply

    • Adam J says:

      09:55am | 06/10/11

      Fact #1:  Communist China has banned gambling,  amongst other personal freedoms
      Fact #2:  A rapidly industrialising China is generating millionnaires with an apetite for gambling as part of an overseas holiday
      Fact #3:  Singapore, Macau, Philippines, Taiwan, Vietnam and Japan are all benefiting from this phenomenon.
      Fact #4:  People commenting in response to this article seem happy for Australia to lose out to other tourist destinations.

      Reply

    • Peter says:

      10:26am | 06/10/11

      Adam, as i asked above, is the author saying that the proposed pre-commitment technology will actually apply to non-Australians (ie. international tourists) on holiday here?  I’ve not heard that before.  I would have thought that relevant before you declare tourism dead, wouldn’t you?

    • Jane says:

      11:12am | 06/10/11

      We cannot compete with the other locations. Like manufacturing. Casino are not unqiue to Australia and where we try to compete on common themes we are too expensive.

      Otherwise Cairns and Gold Coast would not be suffering for the past 4 years would they? If the casino was the be all and end all these areas would not have suffered the depression they have. This despite GBR topping Chinese wish lists for tourism.

      SO your facts are not in fact, fact. They go to Macau for gambling, we need to offer something different.

    • Huey says:

      10:06am | 06/10/11

      Maybe some not bad thoughts on tourism potentials, buuuuuut the pokies part is pure dribbling crap. Bob you ought to be ashamed.

      Reply

    • Emily says:

      10:33am | 06/10/11

      Seriously, I find it hard to believe that so many people can be misinformed and miss the point of this article.

      Yes, maybe the title is over the top, however surely the points Bob has raised are relevant?

      The new Star City in Sydney and Crown in Melbourne are more than just casinos, these places are tourist havens, particularly for the Asian market. If you cut back casino revenue, how do you propose that places such as these keep investing in Australian tourism? Forget pokies in pubs and clubs, its the damage that Wilkie can do to the casino industry that will have an impact on Australian tourism. With the integrated resorts popping up all over Asia, how can Australia compete if we don’t invest in our own integrated resorts? When was the last hotel built in Sydney? In Australia? Tourism can not survive on 5-star accommodation built 2-3 decades ago.

      Despite the impact on tourism, the point still remains, Wilkie is holding the Government to ransom on his pre-commitment legislation and Gillard is too weak to do anything about it!!

      Reply

    • Keith Hammersmith says:

      10:59am | 06/10/11

      I agree emily,  it all com,es down to one no name independant that is having his day due to a hung parliament.  If Labor had won unanimously, we wouldnt be hearing about this.  I do not like the country being held to ransom.  Valid points about the Asian tourist market have been raised.
      The arguments from people above about some pokies in some small town are irrelevant.  There is a valid fact that a lot of people from Asia find casinos and the infrastructure provided a deciding factor in where to go for holidays.
      Not to mention how much of a Nanny state this country is becoming.  seriously we banning cars next or trains?  they hurt people as well.

    • Joe says:

      11:07am | 06/10/11

      As others have pointed out above in several comments, the Parlimentary Committee recommendation is that foreign tourists in casinos be given a card, allowing them to bypass the pre-commitment technology, so it will not affect them in anyway.  Really, this article is a joke and cannot be taken seriously, Bob Baldwin has just proven he is nothing but a mouthpiece for the Casinos and Clubs,  with absolutely no understanding of the issue he is writing about .

    • Economist says:

      11:39am | 06/10/11

      AS Joe and Donna point out, not an issue. Besides I believe that most Casinos hand out high roller cards, even to locals to ensure special treatment for amenities. Is this being changed?

      The industry would do well to shut it’s mouth and rely on the fact that this government, with support from independents, is on the nose for other issues. So far the advertising and cross promotional attempt (rugby league) have back fired. It’s simply bring attention to the issue with the apathetic, who don’t use pokies, and provides a counter voice to those that have been affected by problem gambling who will gain more sympathy than industry or those vocal users that want to maintain the status quo, who are in minority.

    • Peter says:

      12:09pm | 06/10/11

      “Yes, maybe the title is over the top, however surely the points Bob has raised are relevant?”

      But, Emily, that is the whole point.  Not just the title, but the entire argument is way over the top.  The legislation is aimed at helping problem - domestic - gamblers in regards to one simple item: pokie addiction.  Neither you nor the author can provide one speck of evidence that helping these people by limiting their losses is going to do any of the things you or he allege.  It is just scaremongering, plain and simple.

      So I actually think it is you who is misinformed and misses the point of the article.

    • Joe says:

      12:44pm | 06/10/11

      @Keith… Cars and trains are very poor analogy.  I am pretty sure you need a card to legally drive a car or a train, that is called a license.  The government even restricts at what times a license holder can drive their car and how many passengers they can carry, if they are a learner.  So how is that different to requiring a pre-commitment card, that limits how much you can lose, in order to play the pokies?

    • Emily says:

      12:48pm | 06/10/11

      Joe & Economist, you are missing my point. If the industry’s revenue is cut by Wilkie’s pre-commitment, how do you propose that they keep investing money into tourism? I am not talking about whether an international visitor needs a card or not, I am talking about the cost to the industry to introduce pre-commitment and the subsequent loss in revenue. Yes I know that problem gambling is an issue, however I just don’t see how Wilkie’s mandatory pre-commitment idea is going to help. Do you really think problem gambling is so simple that making a problem gambler sign up for card will solve the issue? Wilkie’s pre-commitment is a no-win situation for anyone.

    • Peter says:

      01:16pm | 06/10/11

      @Emily, the problem with your argument is that the industry itself has argued many times in the past that problem pokie gamblers are very few in number, do not represent that much of their revenue and that they take adequate steps to help these people already.  So if the revenue from these people is so insignificant how would helping them make the industry less of an attractive investment?

      The only thing you can say is that it is indeed significant which underscores the need to do something about it.

      And then you add this: “Do you really think problem gambling is so simple that making a problem gambler sign up for card will solve the issue?”. 

      Ok, so please explain that if the legislation will be ineffective, as you suggest, how will it be a threat to the revenue streams of the gambling industry?

    • Joe says:

      01:44pm | 06/10/11

      @Emily ...  There is an easy answer to how the casinos will be able to afford to introduce pre-commitment technology, as the 13 casinos in Australia made a net profit of $3.3 billion dollars, with $2.6 billion from gambling alone, according to the latest figures from the ABS.  So even if it cost them a billion dollars to install the pre-commitement technology, which it certainly wont, they are still making a huge profit, without having to cut their marketing budget or current level of investment in the tourism industry.

    • Stockinbingal roo says:

      10:44am | 06/10/11

      Greed has a voice and it speaks through false prophets like Bob.

      Reply

    • hot tub political machine says:

      10:46am | 06/10/11

      Sorry to keep banging the same drum over and over but again some feedback for le Punch. Sometimes you need to tell people their article is not up to editorial standard and reject it. If this passes your editorial standards then - not harsh just how it is - you’re behind your competition.

      I’m guessing that there must be days you have less articles submitted than others, but sometimes it would be better to have a low number of articles on the site rather than publishing something like – well –this. Less can be more.

      Reply

    • Blind Freddy says:

      10:50am | 06/10/11

      Without poker machines the tourists from China will have more money to buy more souvenirs made in China.

      Reply

    • Expat Ozzie says:

      10:59am | 06/10/11

      I like how you use Singapore as your basis for the article there Bob. But the best bit is you forget to mention that Singapore locals and permanent residents have to purchase a Casio Entry Levi before entering their Casio’s. Wouldn’t wont to cloud the waters of your crap article no would we. It costs $100 sing per person valid for 24 hours and as you have said their tourist industry hasn’t collapsed.The funds are for social and charitable purposes.

      Why is it the tax payer has to pay for morons like you to write one-sided crap like this. Yet another thoughtless piece of crap from our members in Canberra.

      Reply

    • Average Joe says:

      11:30am | 06/10/11

      Get rid of pokies and good riddance! Nothing sucks the life and atmosphere out of a pub quicker than a room full of noisy pokies, manned by dejected looking individuals slotting coin after coin joylessly into them. It’s downright depressing.
      If we must have them, keep them at the casino.

      Reply

    • Kika says:

      01:03pm | 06/10/11

      Not to mention the ones using 5-6 machines concurrently, constantly jumping between one and the other putting more and more money in convinced at least one of them is going to pay up big. That is really depressing…

    • Adam J says:

      11:32am | 06/10/11

      @Peter, isn’t it more sensible for the 1% of pokies users who have a problem to receive counselling, paid for by revenue from pokies, rather than introduce a registration system for all users?

      I can’t see the 30% of occasional (non problem) gamblers bothering to sign up for a pre-commitment scheme.  Pre-commitment is typical gesture politics with scant regard for unintended consequenses. 

      Are you proposing that inbound gambling holiday tourists who want to visit our casinos sign up for a scheme to limit their gambling?  The alternative of introducing more complexity into the proposed scheme by excluding all non-Australians represents the sort of over-bureaucratisation that Aussies are growing tired of, under our Big-Government nanny state.  If I were a problem gambler, I’d apply for a “tourist gambling card” ...or several! 

      Its overly complex and open to abuse.

      I agree that pre-commitment will not “kill tourism”, but Bob makes some very valid points about Australia putting itself at a disadvantage vis a vis other destinations.

      Reply

    • Peter says:

      01:22pm | 06/10/11

      It actually don’t think it’s that overly complex.  You just make it sound like it is.  But, please, explain the unintended consequences because, honestly, I don’t see them.  If you want to play the pokies it’s still very easy to do that.  So please .

      And, by the way, I have personally seen the effects of gambling addiction on a retired man who lived in our neighbourhood, so perhaps this issue is more relevant to me.  He lost his house and all his life savings over a six month period.  His wife didn’t even know what was happening until it was too late.  They now live in poverty.  I know him quite well and, let me tell you, he would have been helped by this sort of legislation.  Sometimes it happens so fast and there is no time for counsellors (who are probably not that effective anyways).

    • Adam J says:

      04:51pm | 07/10/11

      Ok, Peter, the complexity lies in having people apply for a card to activate machines in the first place, trying to avoid the problem that has arisen in Norway where problem gamblers apply for multiple cards, and creating a system to issue inbound tourists with no gambling limits for starters.

      Again, why not just invest a proportion of the revenue into helping problem gamblers beat their addictions?  Psych interventions may also uncover, and lead to treatment for, other personality disorders.  Your friend with the gambling problem would have benefited from help.

    • H B Bear says:

      11:56am | 06/10/11

      The problem with the pokies is the addiction.

      State governments (except WA) are addicted to the revenue.  End of story. Eh Bob?

      Reply

    • Katie says:

      11:58am | 06/10/11

      The use of Singapore as an example of how it should be done is ironic - Singapore is a country that regulates the behaviour of its citizens to an extent that would make your eyes water.  The government there knows that pokies/gambing are bad news, they limit the freedom for it’s citizens to do it,  and there isn’t even a public debate about it, because liberty and freedom are not understood in that country as desirable.
      One of the reasons people love Singapore so much is because it is safe and clean - a direct result of a government that regulates its people.  So if you really like the Singapore model Bob, lets go for it!  Lets get pokies out of pubs and clubs, and into Casino Entertainment complexes where they belong….  and lets scrap the debate…

      Reply

    • Kika says:

      01:06pm | 06/10/11

      Excellent point!

      I have been to Singapore and Sentosa and I was thinking that Singapore is an odd example of a government willing to promote gambling so much, considering the rules and regulations governing everything else in their lives!

      Yeah Bob, take them out of the pubs and clubs and give them back to the Casinos all you like.

    • Kassandra says:

      12:36pm | 06/10/11

      If you want to condition pigeons to peck at a coloured key inside a cage in a laboratory, for some random reason, the most effective way to do it is to reward them with food pellets - but not every time, you reward them sometimes and not others, and you make it unpredictable rather than every second or third time etc. Before long you will have them “addicted” to pecking at the coloured key constantly.

      Interestingly, you can apply exactly the same principle to conditioning humans in a pub, club or casino to give you $1 in exchange for 80c repeatedly, until they run out of money. The principle is known as variable ratio intermittent positive reinforcement and instead of using coloured keys and food pellets you use a poker machine.

      Reply

    • Kika says:

      01:00pm | 06/10/11

      OMG. He just nullified his own argument by saying the Chinese will always go to Singapore and Macau first because of shared language and proximity to the mainland… not to mention they’ve always been gambling/vice havens for Chinese tourists.
      I bet (pardon the pun) that 3/4 business travellers wouldn’t have come all the way to Australia to do business to sit in some dodgy little pub or club in a stinky, depressive pokies room to sit there and get carpal tunnel syndrome from pressing buttons.

      Please… where’s the violins?

      Reply

    • KH says:

      01:49pm | 06/10/11

      All this carry on because someone wants to help people think before they sink their weeks earnings into a poker machine.  There is no license.  It is not mandatory.  Machines that play small amounts won’t need them.  Random users (say, like tourists) don’t need a card.  The card will only help people to be more aware of just how much they are losing.  I just can’t see how that is a bad thing.  Hey I just came up with a good marketing phrase…..‘Think before you Sink’............hehehe

      Reply

    • Jordan says:

      02:40pm | 06/10/11

      Pokies are great! They’re effectively a highly efficient idiot tax. Stupid people rock up to pour in thei money which is then used by alot of clubs to support junior sports teams and other worthwhile community projects.

      Reply

    • hot tub political machine says:

      03:16pm | 06/10/11

      Sadly,these people who are opting for paying an extra tax also have kids who didn’t get to pick their parents.

    • SLF says:

      02:50pm | 06/10/11

      I knew those fuckwits at Tourism Australia had it wrong all of those years! Forget campaigns involving beaches, the bush, flora and fauna, it is pokies that people want.

      Australia, throw another buck in the pokie mate!

      Reply

    • Peter says:

      03:20pm | 06/10/11

      So, can we all agree that Mr Bob Baldwin has been owned in this thread?

      Reply

    • mebobmedumb says:

      03:35pm | 06/10/11

      hahahaha, oh Bob, you just got so pwned. What a load of tripe.

      Reply

    • Cynthia Crabapple says:

      04:01pm | 06/10/11

      Utter rubbish. Whales don’t mix with mix with minnows. They eat them, but don’t mix with them. To compare clubs/pubs with Singapore casinos is no contribution to the debate regarding the devastating impact of poker machine gaming addiction. Keep your rusty moral compass.

      Reply

    • Adam J says:

      06:13pm | 07/10/11

      Take a walk through any Aussie casinos and you’ll mix with inbound tourists.  Certainly the whales are in the high roller rooms, but they’re not the people this article is referring to.

    • stephen says:

      07:02pm | 06/10/11

      Pokies as tourism ?
      Crap ; it’s like putting up a tree and calling it the Hilton, and anyway, the kind of spenders you get at a poker machine would baulk at paying full-fare on a bus.
      And if they don’t spend, they don’t stay.

      Reply

    • Paul baird says:

      07:40pm | 06/10/11

      punch team I call bullshit on you. Thats the second article in 2 days that seem to have been written and paid for by clubs australia. Whats the pay off? wake up to yourselves!!!!

      Reply

    • marley says:

      08:58pm | 06/10/11

      Well, look at it this way - it backfired, big time.

    • AG says:

      11:26pm | 06/10/11

      One question - if you are a Singaporean resident, are you permitted to gamble at these two new resorts? (I thought I read somewhere that you couldn’t)

      Reply

    • Jilianna says:

      07:03am | 29/02/12

      you must read <a >cheap chanel handbags</a>  at my estore

      Reply
 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 09:27PM

Dementor doing a good job for sweden #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 09:11PM

Ukraine song pinches chord progression from The Verve's Bittersweet Symphony. Fo real #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 09:00PM

RT @GerardDaffy: @antsharwood all the talk over there is the grannies will win.they entered to get a church built,feelgood story

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 08:57PM

These peole insult my grandmothjer, who was born in minsk, belarus #sbseurovision

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project

by Claire Connelly

41

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project

I’d like to be able to say that sharing the world’s largest radio telescope with South Africa…

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics

by Laurie Oakes

60

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics

When North Queensland Liberal MP George Christensen got the idea of launching a new political organisation…

Please enter your password

by Lucy Kippist

39

Please enter your password

Help! I’ve succumbed to a crippling modern illness that can strike at any moment. Symptoms include:…

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]

Light weight

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

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed