Monique Ryan (Kooyong, Independent) | Hansard source

I second this motion and commend the member for Curtin's motion to refer the Interactive Gambling Amendment (Gambling Reform) Bill 2026 to the House Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs. This should not be a controversial request. It's a sensible and reasonable solution and suggestion from the crossbench and is exactly what legislation of this significance deserves. Australians have waited more than three years for meaningful gambling reform in the wake of the Murphy report. That's a thousand days of inaction from this government and a thousand days in which young Australians, the Australians that we represent, have been harmed by that inaction.

Australians have continued to lose their savings, their relationships, their homes and, in some tragic cases, their lives because of the inaction of this government. After this sort of delay, the government has no excuses for not getting this legislation right. But it's rushing to introduce legislation that has been denied input from the public. The families who we represent and the young people who are being taken advantage of by predatory gambling industries have been given no ability to have input into this crucial legislation.

The government's released an exposure draft but has not decided to conduct appropriate open and transparent public consultation. Instead, it's held targeted conversations with the broadcasters, the sporting codes and the gambling industry. What about the families who live every day with the consequences or the ongoing challenges of harm caused by gambling? What about the parents who are concerned that every time their kids open the AFL app, they see Sportsbet? What about the clinicians, the researchers, the public health experts and the community organisations who have spent years documenting the devastating impact of gambling addiction? Some of them have been given days to review this complex legislation and provide feedback on it to a very limited extent. Some have been given no opportunity at all.

A committee inquiry would allow us to hear directly from those people who would be most affected by this legislation to test the evidence, to identify the potential unintended consequences and to improve the legislation. That's what this place and the committees associated with parliament are supposed to do. There are questions that deserve careful examination. The Murphy report was pretty clear. It recommended a comprehensive ban on gambling advertising, including online advertising. The government has not responded to that recommendation appropriately. Its proposals fall well short of that. There are ongoing and serious questions about the extent to which this legislation will provide any support or any protections for children and for vulnerable Australians. The parliament is showing a willingness to legislate on digital harm and to act on the digital environments. The government has constantly trumpeted its social media ban, which is not working, but the government is not taking action to protect young Australians from a danger which is just as significant and which is in front of them every single day.

Peta Murphy was a friend of many people in this House. She was closer to members of the government than she was to the crossbench or the opposition. We shouldn't have to keep reminding the government of the extraordinary work done by one of their own. We know that members of the government feel conflicted about their inaction on this point. We know that it upsets them and angers them when we raise the question of Peta Murphy's contribution and how strongly she felt about this. We shouldn't have to do this. We shouldn't be having these difficult, tortured conversations. We should just be doing what is right for the people and the communities that we represent in the best interests of not just the parliament but the constituents who come to us every week and raise this issue. Their spirit and their belief in the democratic process should not be disrespected by this parliament.

We've waited more than three years. We can wait another three or four weeks and scrutinise this legislation properly. If the government believes that this legislation is worth doing, then it should subject it to the scrutiny that it deserves. That includes giving the public an opportunity to feed back on something which will change their lives—one of the most significant public health crises that the country is facing right now. For those reasons, I urge the House to refer this bill immediately to the House Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs so that the parliament can properly examine the evidence, hear from those Australians affected most by this legislation and ensure that these long overdue reforms are as effective as they can possibly be.

See this speech in context