Bills

Statutes Amendment (Gambling - Opening Hours and Signage) Bill

Second Reading

The Hon. C. BONAROS (16:02): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

This is the second of three bills that I will be introducing or have introduced today all relating to gambling. This particular bill follows on from the one that I introduced earlier today in relation to poker machines specifically. You have probably heard the saying, 'Nothing good ever happens after midnight,' but in this case we are being generous and saying 2am.

The bill seeks to ensure poker machines in this jurisdiction are turned off between the hours of 2am and 8am. It is a modest move but an important one, especially when you consider the harm gambling causes, particularly in those late night and early morning hours when people are most vulnerable. The current requirement that exists in our laws is for venues to close their poker machine rooms for at least six hours a day.

These closures can be split into two or three periods, meaning in theory someone could still play 24 hours a day by hopping from one venue to another, and we know that is quite prevalent amongst problem gamblers. We also know that problem gamblers overwhelmingly contribute the majority of poker machine revenue both for venues and in terms of government revenue. We also know that venues manipulate that six-hour break to the quiet periods that they are likely to have, so in effect somebody does not really feel like they are missing out on much.

I have certainly spoken to problem gamblers over the years who have told me how they simply wait for that venue to reopen its doors so they can go in and continue to gamble, effectively picking up where they left off on the same machine they were playing in the hope of winning back all the money that they poured into it before being forced to leave for that break that is required in terms of closure.

If you are asking why someone needs to be playing poker machines at 3am or 5am I think you already know the answer; there is no good reason. The Alliance for Gambling Reform advocates for machine shutdowns from midnight to 10am and, frankly, that is a position I support. However, I am also a realist and, if we cannot get there immediately, I suggest that let us at least move towards more sensible restrictions.

At the moment, when one door closes another can open. The venue-hopping loophole undermines the spirit of the existing six-hour closure rule, and it is high time we closed it. We should not kid ourselves: there is clear data backing this up. In 2022 the Australian Institute of Family Studies conducted a national gambling trend study, published just last year. What did that tell us? It told us that people most at risk of gambling harm are those who gamble between midnight and 8am. While the busiest times are typically in the evening, it is those late night and early morning sessions that catch the most vulnerable.

Over half of regular poker machine gamblers gamble at least once a week, and many for more than an hour each time. Alarmingly, 6.3 per cent of participants in that study reported gambling for more than 24 hours straight. That is extraordinary, but it is even more extraordinary that we allow that to happen in this jurisdiction, knowing what we know about poker machines. That is not entertainment, that is addiction.

Most of these individuals are gambling alone, they are using cash. They are making it easy to hide from loved ones. This is not a social event, it is a solitary spiral. If we are serious about tackling problem gambling in South Australia—and that is what we hear; there is not a lot of meat behind that claim when it comes to either side of this chamber—if we are serious about doing something, this is one of the small measures we need to look at very seriously to add protections for people who are unable to protect themselves against those vulnerabilities. It is that simple.

The bill also seeks to prohibit certain types of gambling-related signage, specifically anything designed to lure people into venues. We all know the signs—VIP Lounge, neon lights, for example—subtly or not so subtly enticing people in. Removing those signs is another step in the right direction, and I note that in many European countries those signs are not allowed. It certainly makes those venues much less enticing for somebody wandering by. We should not be encouraging people to walk into these traps.

I am sure that when the government and the opposition are considering this their number one concern will not be in terms of community safety—if that were the case we would have already implemented these measures. The statistics alone in terms of losses in this jurisdiction show clearly that that is not our primary focus. The fact that the government of the day collects close to a billion dollars from poker machines in pubs and clubs, not including the Casino, shows that we have been half-hearted and disingenuous in our attempts to deal with the scourge of poker machines.

The government, addicted to revenue, might not be thrilled with these proposals but, just as I asked in the previous debate and as I will ask in the next debate, we really need to be asking ourselves at what cost are we going to continue to allow this industry to operate in the way it does.

There have been reports just recently—and there is a report will I refer to in my next speech from the Grattan institute just recently—that talk about the lax regulatory approach we have taken here in Australia generally to the issue of gambling overall. We know that per capita, as I said previously, we spend more on gambling in Australia than anywhere else in the world. We know that for every person, including children, there is about $1,550 lost on poker machines, on gambling, and those figures are ever increasing.

Successive South Australian governments have continued to prioritise revenue over the wellbeing of our community. I will have more to say about this in the next bill that I seek to move, but I will continue to engage in open discussions with stakeholders, including the AHA, as we move forward with these reform proposals because I actually think there is room for common ground here, and I am hopeful we can land somewhere sensible.

I am on the record very clearly in terms of my position in relation to the poker machine lobby in this country, and the influence that they have over politics and the inappropriateness of that, and the money that they donate to political parties and therefore our reluctance to curtail the products that they provide at such huge cost to the community.

That to me is unacceptable because ultimately whatever we are receiving in revenue from poker machines pales into insignificance compared to the actual costs to the community long term. We know that. We have a longstanding position in relation to poker machines and this bill is part of that ongoing commitment to reducing harm. It is not just about protecting problem gamblers; it is about protecting their families, their futures and their livelihoods. I remind all honourable members just how rampant an issue this is throughout our community.

I also remind honourable members that in the time since we have introduced poker machines into this jurisdiction, those losses have increased from something like $185 million, I think, in the first year of operating in this state to—and I do not want to misquote the figures, Mr Acting President, so if you will just bear with me for a tick. While I am looking for that, we know that those figures have increased extraordinarily, and members might be familiar with a recent article that was in the press on this very issue that highlighted the significance of these machines operating in the way that we allow them to operate today.

But, as I said previously, right now as it stands, despite the fact that governments and lobby groups have argued that there has not been a real increase in poker machine losses, or that there was an expectation that after COVID we would not see figures increase, the exact opposite has indeed occurred. I think at last count those figures were sitting at about just shy of $1 billion that the government was raking into its government coffers.

I think it is also important to note that with that revenue comes a great deal of responsibility on the part of the government and, indeed, the providers of those machines, and it irks me to know that less than 1 per cent of what we collect via government and venues in terms of revenue actually goes towards the Gamblers Rehabilitation Fund.

If you consider almost $1 billion, between the casino, the venues and the government, the proportion of spend that goes towards rehabilitative services is less than 1 per cent of the total revenue source. I think that speaks volumes about how little we have treated the impacts of poker machines. Again, as I said in my previous contribution, we are talking about machines that absolutely wreak havoc on communities: suicide, poverty, family violence, domestic violence, crime—all these factors are intrinsically linked, inevitably, with gambling addiction, yet we do nothing meaningful to address them.

In fact, the only major reform this place has made in recent years was a backwards step. When we, under the former government with the support of this government, introduced note acceptors into this jurisdiction we effectively undid the number one harm minimisation measure that we had in the jurisdiction. We have seen how much that has cost us now. You do not need to take my word for it. The figures speak for themselves in terms of those losses.

For the benefit of members, I have split these bills into separate bills, and whilst I would love the idea of discussing with government and the opposition all of the proposals together, I do not want the government to be put off one because they are all packaged together. So what I am asking of members of this place is to consider each one individually on its merits.

I did have those figures that I quoted, and I will end with this: on the anniversary of poker machines in this jurisdiction when we did an assessment in my office of those losses we had $185.4 million in the first year. Those cumulative losses have now reached $19.7 billion, of which the government has gained $7.8 billion in taxes and venues have reaped $11.9 billion. It is laughable when the government or industry says they put money back into providing appropriate services. Most of that money that I have just referred to comes off the back of not entertainment but problem gambling and gambling addiction.

So I urge honourable members to approach this bill and, indeed, the other two bills that I am introducing today with a very open mind with a view to making a genuine dent in the harm that is caused by problem gambling and poker machines particularly.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. I.K. Hunter.