Page 2640 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 25 September 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
have an obligation to our more vulnerable members to prevent them from avoidable harm. This is the balance that must be struck and unfortunately, as it stands, I do not believe we have reached the right balance.
There is no-one in this Assembly who would stand up and say with a straight face that poker machines do not cause significant harm for a significant number of people. What we should be debating is what we are going to do about it. The Greens have long advocated for increased harm minimisation measures. We see this as a public health issue. Not only are the lives of problem gamblers themselves at risk, with between 35 to 60 in Australia killing themselves each year; those around them are having their lives devastated as well. On average, seven other people are adversely affected by a severe problem gambler’s behaviour.
So what are we going to do about it? There are many simple and practical measures that could be taken, such as reducing the numbers of machines. The gambling and racing commission recommended against any further increase. However, this is a problem that needs to be curbed rather than just maintained and, as such, I would support a reduction in pokie numbers. Another measure is to remove ATMs from venues or at least anywhere near gaming rooms. The Assembly, in 2004, prevented them from being in gaming areas, but as well as ensuring they are a good distance from the gaming area, a daily limit of a couple of hundred dollars would minimise harm, bearing in mind that people do have access to EFTPOS to purchase meals and other things in the club.
We need to prohibit note-taking machines. Currently one can put up to $20 at a time into a poker machine. I acknowledge that this is better than $50 or $100 notes, but why not be really bold and remove note acceptors altogether from machines? We could reduce the value of each game so that dollars last longer and gamblers lose less, put clocks on the machines and make sure that venues are naturally lit rather than being dark, fluorescent lit caves, pre-schedule breaks in machines so that they turn off for 10 minutes every hour or so and ensure that breaks are enforced after a payout so that people have the option to walk away. We all know the mesmerising impact of the gaming machines, and that is what needs to be broken.
Those who work in the area and represent those most at risk from problem gambling such as Care financial services, ACTCOSS or those directly responsible for picking up the pieces like Lifeline strongly advocate this type of approach and these kinds of measures. These are the experts and this is what they are saying. We need these practical measures to help prevent those who do not have a problem from developing one and mitigating the impacts on and helping cure those who do.
According to Lifeline, in the ACT one in eight gamblers is a problem gambler, and problem gamblers account for 30 per cent of the revenues from pokies. According to Mr Stanhope, 2.9 per cent are problem gamblers, but they account for 30 per cent of the revenues from pokies. I have consistently said it is not gambling itself that is the problem; it is problem gambling. Here, as we can see, is the problem. In 2005-06 ACT gaming machine revenue was an astonishing $113,075,398. That means that $33,922,619 came from gamblers whose problem is that logic does not control how much they put into the machines.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .