Page 3082 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 22 August 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I also trust that the government will come back to this issue as the technology in this area evolves. Should new technology become available that could restrict EFTPOS transactions to a daily limit per card then that would be a more comprehensive solution to this problem. This solution would provide better protections for problem gamblers, whilst not placing unreasonable restrictions on other club members, who could still take out $200 in cash and pay for other expenses on their cards.
While, as I have said, this is not a perfect solution, the Greens will be supporting this bill because it is a good first step towards improved harm minimisation in pokies venues. In addition to these changes, we would like to see a number of other reforms which would better protect people at risk of gambling harm, in combination with ATM and EFTPOS cash-out limits. While gambling harm is an under-researched field, the best available evidence supports measures which limit both the time and money a person can spend in a gambling session. At last year’s election we called for the introduction of mandatory precommitment and $1 maximum bets on all poker machines across the ACT, in line with the Productivity Commission’s recommendations.
Currently the ACT has a maximum bet of $10 per spin for a bet, which can lead to spends of up to $1,200 per hour. The evidence suggests that most people bet between 25c and $1 per spin, with only 12 per cent of recreational gamblers betting more than that. However, problem gamblers have indicated that the option to bet up to $10 can encourage them to increase the size of their bets to chase a win. This shows that a $1 maximum bet is likely to have little effect on most players and would directly target problem gamblers when they are at their most vulnerable.
Another key measure that would help to reduce harm from problem gambling is the introduction of mandatory precommitment. This system allows gamblers to determine how much they want to spend and set binding limits each time they play. We know that the features on many poker machines affect a player’s ability to make rational choices. The machines are designed to encourage people to play for longer and to spend more. By requiring a player to set a limit on their spending before they start, the likelihood that they will spend beyond what they intended is reduced. Both of these measures are about creating a safe environment where people can play recreationally but the risk of developing gambling problems is minimised.
Additionally, the government’s commitment to reduce the number of poker machines in the ACT to 4,000 will be important for minimising harm. I take this opportunity to recognise the work that has occurred already in preparing the policy paper which was tabled last week by the Attorney-General. Working out how we can get down to 4,000 poker machines in a fair and structured way will be important to help clubs as they seek to diversify their revenue streams. I encourage all clubs and interested community members to engage with the consultation and provide feedback on the options outlined in the paper.
Harm minimisation is most effective when there are a suite of measures in place. Limiting access to cash is one important part of this issue, and today’s legislation goes
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video